Redstate

I am sorry, but I am really tired of people using the "earmark" crutch to undermine more important issues.

Yes, I think we are spending too much money. If you think for a second Busby wouldnt be voting for those earmarks (and more) then you are kidding for your self.

Busby is a hard core socialist. Reagan always said that democracy is a generation away from being lost.

It is with your attitude that we will lose our freedoms. People like Busby dont give a rat's rear end about our freedoms and liberties. In fact, they would prefer that government would make up our minds for us.

You would support her and her type it sounds like, just because of "ear marks."

Yeah, lets give in to socialism just because of "ear marks." BLEH. I am tired of it already.

http://www.redstate.com/comments/2006/6/5/16575/18014/36#36

Bill Clinton is owed a great debt because he proved once and for all character matters. A scoundrel is a scoundrel first a democrat or republican second. The problem is of course the fact that the democrats wanted to make something more of this than it really was and the very real worry of a democratic majority.

The thing to take away from this is get involved in the primaries. Incumbancy shouldn't mean a cakewalk to the republican nomination for a safe seat.

Bilbray lived in DC and worked as a lobbyist and got tons of money from outside interests in this campaign. He is the poster boy for what is wrong with Congress.

He has never even lived in the district - why would anyone expect he would represent the district?

Wasn't that sufficient proof that he was a conservative?

Maybe single-issue litmus tests are a bad idea after all... a bit late now, since Bilbray's going to be in there.

Well, as luck would have it, you do have to do it again in November.

The Busby vs. Bilbray rematch is in less than 6 months. So, you can hop on that plane and get campaigning.

Don't forget to bring your english-to-spanish dictonary so you can learn how to say useful phrases like, "usted no necesita papeles legeles a ayuda."

Just kidding. Really all you might be able to do is get a bunch of conservatives to send Bilbray a bunch of contribution IOU papers that you label "Earmarked Contributions". These can be a reverse contributation in kind. Every earmark $ he passes is a $ you do not send in political donations, since we have to hang on to them to pay for the earmarks.

Really all you might be able to do is get a bunch of conservatives to send Bilbray a bunch of contribution IOU papers that you label "Earmarked Contributions". These can be a reverse contributation in kind. Every earmark $ he passes is a $ you do not send in political donations, since we have to hang on to them to pay for the earmarks.

That's a clever idea.

Busby would have voted for that and more. And she would have stood strong to open America's borders.

And voted for the defeatocrat strategy to lose the war.

We are not voting for perfection.

We are voting to get as much done as we can.

Never going to happen. You throw a system at this guy to control him he will game it and he will get past it. You'll be throwing your hat on the ground and stomping on it when hes done. Get the man out in 08 find another republican one of good character and see that he gets the nomination.

But seriously, Busby was not nor is she now a viable option even to an earmark loving porker like Bilbray. For all the reasons mentioned above. Also as much as I hate these big spenders the seat in the R column is more important.

I don't see how Busby winning the seat has any benefit to our side at all? Please feel free to give examples if you can find any? But I have a feeling you were going for effect rather than being serious!  

I'll right a letter to Congressman Ed Royce asking him to grab Bilbray by the ear and smack some sense into him!!!

While I do detest the system, I think it's important to remember that earmarks aren't the core problem here.

Earmarks don't increase spending; they only direct it.

How do you square this posting with this line from the previous posting (assuming RS Politics is one person...):

Just another reason why we can't afford to have Democrats in control of Congress during a time of war.

Is this just a "kicked if you do, kicked if you don't" sort of thing?  If so, I certainly understand that.  Pushing for Republican candidates only to see them spend our money foolishly does make me want to bang my head against the nearest wall.....

The spure of the moment idea is just a scheme to raise awareness to the problem and help define it in terms that support a view of earmarks being political paybacks to donors.

You have to keep shining the light on a problem until it is resolved to your satisfaction. To maintain problem illumination on long-term problems it means coming up with new methods of "light shining" from time to time to recapture people's interest.

...now that Bilbray has been elected, I hope that the Club for Growth is out huntin' up a candidate to beat him in the primary in 2008.

that Bilray voted against all of Flake's pork cutting amendments.

But it is also true that in doing so, he voted along with 170+ House Republicans. The Flake amendments did not simply lose, they were crushed. From which I draw two conclusion; that Bilrays vote was not a factor, and that the amendments were very unpopular with three quarters of House Republicans.

that is very clever. it might take off like the "send a brick" program if someone got it organized.

There are two kinds of Republicans in Washington.

The first are the kind that help us keep some sort of control.

The second are conservatives.

While I'd love to have enough of the second that we could dump all of the first, we don't.

So I'll take Bilbray (as well as Chafee) and find the non-conservatives from conservative states and districts and replace them in the 2008 primaries with conservatives.

you disliked Bilbray's strong anti-illegal aliens platform.  Earmarks are an afterthought for you.

Calling him a "lobbyist" makes Bilbray sound like some Gucci-wearing Enron facilitator.  In fact, Bilbray's only lobbbying was on behalf of FAIR, a non-profit, educational organization dedicated to fighting illegal aliens.

I supported Bilbray (donation) b/c I liked what he said about immigration.  No regrets whatever.

Time to let go of that Bilbray obsession.   He's going to vote a conservative line now, because he represents a conservative constituency & has a safe seat.

He got beat in his old ditrict for being TOO conservative.  Cut the guy some slack... Bet you he gets an ACU rating of 80 or higher going forward.

He won the 4/11 primary fair & square.  The hard-right candidates (Roach, Kaloogian, etc.) lost because there were too MANY of them in the race.

Who started out near her husband in reliable voting, but has gradually shifted to the left.

Just watch to see if Bilbray makes positive noises about the Republican Main Streeters, I guess.

Nor is being a spoiled conservative, do it my way, or I will take my vote and go home, or worse, vote for the other candidate. Is there one chance in a million that Busby would vote for lower spending than Bilbray? Cmon, get real. Life is full of choices and Bilbray is clearly better than Busby...

"Gucci-wearing Enron facilitator"

I would hazard to guess that he was making a nice piece of change in DC. He certainly got a ton of cold hard cash for his campaign from there. He is a DC politician - of course he is going to take care of his buddies - he knows where he gets paid (off).

The guy has never lived in the district and has been lining his pockets with money from people outside the district. Why would you think he represents the district over those folks. He is an honorable man, afterall.

PS: I didn't vote for Busby.

With friends like these, we might as well have elected Busby.

No, not even close.  Just because he's fiscally disappointing out of the gate does not place him in the same category.

• He is still an R which helps with the overall makeup of committees and leadership
  
• Assuming it's not a bait-and-switch, he is by far better on borders/immigration than Busby
  
• He's not any more fiscally irresponsible (re earmark protection) than most of the other R's on the Hill

The choice is (1) replacing him at the next primary, (2) choosing a known race panderer and friend of illegals (also a D), or (3) working the phones and mail to convince him of the error of his early voting pattern.

He also might be angling for a committee posting from someone who needed his vote -- it may have nothing to do with personal conviction.  Remember, the guy is a politician....

There are bigger issues here than earmarks.

Bilbray's election helped send a message to Republicans and Demos alike that open borders are not acceptable. Hopefully they will get a repeat of that message on June 27, when incumbent Chris Cannon loses to challenger John Jacob in Utah.

If Bilbray had lost we'd all now be on the express train to Amnesty Central.

I'm fed up with pork, too, but let us put first things first.

"Assuming it's not a bait-and-switch, he is by far better on borders/immigration than Busby."

Even if it's a bait-and-switch it matters little. Sure, I want him to be sincere on the matter, but that's secondary.

If this election hadn't been until November no one would pay much attention. The value of CA-50 is instructive and predictive. What's going on with the electorate? How do they respond to certain issues? Well, now we know: they don't want amnesty. Period. It helps for Republicans to get that straightened out now so that they don't go down to defeat in November.

This isn't the typical district - it is probably one of the very wealthiest in the whole US congress.

I do find it ironic their take on immigration. In my neighborhood, virtually every single home has had work done by illegals in the last year.

Hillary Clinton was different?

She got NO money from the DC elite. NO WAY.

SHe never lived a minute in New York.

She made many promises, like "I will bring 200,000 new jobs to Western New York. Over the last 6 years, the net job loss has continued to rise. She never brought ONE job to WNY.

Not too much complaint there though. After all, she's a CLINTON!!!

Two peas in a pod.

Of course i do care more about the guy who represents me (errrr, DC money interests).

If a bunch of people who routinely hire illegals are upset about it, what does that say about more middle class districts?

My impression is that the reason a lot of people in such districts think that illegals are doing jobs "Americans won't do" is because in those places there aren't any Americans left doing those jobs. A typical American family couldn't afford to live in a decent home in such a district. In the rest of America, there are still plenty of Americans doing these jobs. They find it offensive when some Republicans seem to suggest that these jobs are "beneath" Americans.

That's where all the lobbyists live.

I came from a blue collar background and made damm sure that jobs like that were beneath me. Worked my butt off for decades. There is no promise in this country that the government will take care of you and entitle your prosperity - you still got to earn it.

If a man grows up in America, with all its advantages and benefits, he ought to be able to do better than compete for jobs that could go to an illegal with no skills who can't speak the language.  

Lets not take away the incentive to get educated and skilled and improve yourself. Motivated people trying to get better is what this country needs and a little competition never hurt.  

aren't "motivated?" Some of the most motivated kids I ever knew ran very profitable lawn care businesses when they were still in middle school. That's a rare sight today. Most of that work is now being done by Mexicans.

You also see lots and lots of highly motivated college students graduating with mountains of student loan debt. That wouldn't be as much the case if they could find decent-paying jobs while they were in college. I've eaten at restaurants right across from college campuses - from the dorms, actually - that were staffed by Mexicans.

But the more important point is that there are some Americans who will never acquire better skills. Some of them can't. Some of them won't. Should those people be doomed to a life of miserable poverty because of that?

Explain to me how making sure that no "Americans" will ever do these jobs because they aren't properly "motivated" doesn't doom us to a neverending, every increasing cycle of more and more immigration?

Jobs like these will always need to be done. You don't have to be an environmental nut to believe there are rational limits to how many people can live comfortably inside this country.