|
Hey, Scotty, what do you think about THIS:
|
Hey, Scotty, what do you think about THIS:
In article , says...
On 1/5/2013 2:33 PM, Meyer wrote: On 1/5/2013 12:59 PM, ESAD wrote: JustWait wrote: On 1/5/2013 12:08 PM, wrote: On Sat, 5 Jan 2013 08:54:58 -0500, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... Do you mean the statement about heroin from the DEA or are we talking about H.R.1 YOU said that if it was a clean bill it would have "sailed through". How do you know this? That is the cite I want. Clear enough? I'll be waiting. A clean bill, simply giving money to the disaster victims would have provided the political cover they had in opposing this pork laden bill. Oh, oh... so you can't prove it would have? You must be a moron!snerk.. Now prove you have been inhaling and exhaling all day long, steadily, since midnight!!!!!! LOL! When is your afib going to catch up with you, moron? Probably never.. Even if it does, it really doesn't slow me down much... Well, it's not like you have a job or anything... |
Hey, Scotty, what do you think about THIS:
|
Hey, Scotty, what do you think about THIS:
On 1/7/2013 10:39 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 6 Jan 2013 09:48:15 -0500, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 5 Jan 2013 12:14:26 -0500, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 5 Jan 2013 08:54:58 -0500, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... Do you mean the statement about heroin from the DEA or are we talking about H.R.1 YOU said that if it was a clean bill it would have "sailed through". How do you know this? That is the cite I want. Clear enough? I'll be waiting. A clean bill, simply giving money to the disaster victims would have provided the political cover they had in opposing this pork laden bill. Again, I'll ask "how do you know this"? Because a somewhat clean bill for FEMA funding just sailed through. You are even here talking about it. "somewhat clean"?? Are you kidding me??? Almost ALL of the pork is still there, and it wasn't a real reason why Boehner didn't want to vote on it anyway, he's politically motivated and didn't want is shadowing over his attempt to derail the country over the cliff. Bull**** This is the text of the whole ****ing bill that passed. H.R.41 -- To temporarily increase the borrowing authority of the Federal Emergency Management Agency for carrying out the National Flood Insurance Program. (Introduced in House - IH) HR 41 IH 113th CONGRESS 1st Session H. R. 41 To temporarily increase the borrowing authority of the Federal Emergency Management Agency for carrying out the National Flood Insurance Program. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES January 3, 2013 Mr. GARRETT (for himself, Mr. SMITH of New Jersey, Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN, Mr. LANCE, Mr. GRIMM, Mr. HANNA, Mr. KING of New York, Mr. MEEKS, Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York, Mrs. MCCARTHY of New York, Mr. CROWLEY, Mr. NADLER, Mr. ANDREWS, Mr. RUNYAN, Mr. LOBIONDO, Ms. MENG, Mr. SEAN PATRICK MALONEY of New York, Mr. PASCRELL, Mr. TONKO, and Mr. BISHOP of New York) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services, and in addition to the Committee on the Budget, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned A BILL To temporarily increase the borrowing authority of the Federal Emergency Management Agency for carrying out the National Flood Insurance Program. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. TEMPORARY INCREASE IN BORROWING AUTHORITY FOR NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM. (a) Section 1309(a) of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4016(a)) is amended by striking `$20,725,000,000' and inserting `$30,425,000,000'. (b) The amount provided by this section is designated by the Congress as an emergency requirement pursuant to section 403(a) of S. Con. Res. 13 (111th Congress), the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2010, and as an emergency pursuant to section 4(g) of the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010 (2 U.S.C. 933(g)). Unbelievable... |
Hey, Scotty, what do you think about THIS:
On 1/7/2013 10:39 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 6 Jan 2013 09:48:15 -0500, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 5 Jan 2013 12:14:26 -0500, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 5 Jan 2013 08:54:58 -0500, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... Do you mean the statement about heroin from the DEA or are we talking about H.R.1 YOU said that if it was a clean bill it would have "sailed through". How do you know this? That is the cite I want. Clear enough? I'll be waiting. A clean bill, simply giving money to the disaster victims would have provided the political cover they had in opposing this pork laden bill. Again, I'll ask "how do you know this"? Because a somewhat clean bill for FEMA funding just sailed through. You are even here talking about it. "somewhat clean"?? Are you kidding me??? Almost ALL of the pork is still there, and it wasn't a real reason why Boehner didn't want to vote on it anyway, he's politically motivated and didn't want is shadowing over his attempt to derail the country over the cliff. Bull**** This is the text of the whole ****ing bill that passed. H.R.41 -- To temporarily increase the borrowing authority of the Federal Emergency Management Agency for carrying out the National Flood Insurance Program. (Introduced in House - IH) HR 41 IH 113th CONGRESS 1st Session H. R. 41 To temporarily increase the borrowing authority of the Federal Emergency Management Agency for carrying out the National Flood Insurance Program. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES January 3, 2013 Mr. GARRETT (for himself, Mr. SMITH of New Jersey, Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN, Mr. LANCE, Mr. GRIMM, Mr. HANNA, Mr. KING of New York, Mr. MEEKS, Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York, Mrs. MCCARTHY of New York, Mr. CROWLEY, Mr. NADLER, Mr. ANDREWS, Mr. RUNYAN, Mr. LOBIONDO, Ms. MENG, Mr. SEAN PATRICK MALONEY of New York, Mr. PASCRELL, Mr. TONKO, and Mr. BISHOP of New York) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services, and in addition to the Committee on the Budget, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned A BILL To temporarily increase the borrowing authority of the Federal Emergency Management Agency for carrying out the National Flood Insurance Program. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. TEMPORARY INCREASE IN BORROWING AUTHORITY FOR NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM. (a) Section 1309(a) of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4016(a)) is amended by striking `$20,725,000,000' and inserting `$30,425,000,000'. (b) The amount provided by this section is designated by the Congress as an emergency requirement pursuant to section 403(a) of S. Con. Res. 13 (111th Congress), the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2010, and as an emergency pursuant to section 4(g) of the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010 (2 U.S.C. 933(g)). Figures, when the republicans block a storm sandy bill that is 65% pork, the media goes nuts... But when the republicans force the democrats to pass this bill, nobody says a word... |
Hey, Scotty, what do you think about THIS:
In article , says...
On 1/7/2013 10:39 AM, wrote: On Sun, 6 Jan 2013 09:48:15 -0500, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 5 Jan 2013 12:14:26 -0500, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 5 Jan 2013 08:54:58 -0500, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... Do you mean the statement about heroin from the DEA or are we talking about H.R.1 YOU said that if it was a clean bill it would have "sailed through". How do you know this? That is the cite I want. Clear enough? I'll be waiting. A clean bill, simply giving money to the disaster victims would have provided the political cover they had in opposing this pork laden bill. Again, I'll ask "how do you know this"? Because a somewhat clean bill for FEMA funding just sailed through. You are even here talking about it. "somewhat clean"?? Are you kidding me??? Almost ALL of the pork is still there, and it wasn't a real reason why Boehner didn't want to vote on it anyway, he's politically motivated and didn't want is shadowing over his attempt to derail the country over the cliff. Bull**** This is the text of the whole ****ing bill that passed. H.R.41 -- To temporarily increase the borrowing authority of the Federal Emergency Management Agency for carrying out the National Flood Insurance Program. (Introduced in House - IH) HR 41 IH 113th CONGRESS 1st Session H. R. 41 To temporarily increase the borrowing authority of the Federal Emergency Management Agency for carrying out the National Flood Insurance Program. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES January 3, 2013 Mr. GARRETT (for himself, Mr. SMITH of New Jersey, Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN, Mr. LANCE, Mr. GRIMM, Mr. HANNA, Mr. KING of New York, Mr. MEEKS, Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York, Mrs. MCCARTHY of New York, Mr. CROWLEY, Mr. NADLER, Mr. ANDREWS, Mr. RUNYAN, Mr. LOBIONDO, Ms. MENG, Mr. SEAN PATRICK MALONEY of New York, Mr. PASCRELL, Mr. TONKO, and Mr. BISHOP of New York) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services, and in addition to the Committee on the Budget, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned A BILL To temporarily increase the borrowing authority of the Federal Emergency Management Agency for carrying out the National Flood Insurance Program. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. TEMPORARY INCREASE IN BORROWING AUTHORITY FOR NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM. (a) Section 1309(a) of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4016(a)) is amended by striking `$20,725,000,000' and inserting `$30,425,000,000'. (b) The amount provided by this section is designated by the Congress as an emergency requirement pursuant to section 403(a) of S. Con. Res. 13 (111th Congress), the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2010, and as an emergency pursuant to section 4(g) of the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010 (2 U.S.C. 933(g)). Unbelievable... It is if you are stupid enough to think that the above is the whole bill!! |
Hey, Scotty, what do you think about THIS:
In article , says...
On 1/7/2013 10:39 AM, wrote: On Sun, 6 Jan 2013 09:48:15 -0500, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 5 Jan 2013 12:14:26 -0500, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 5 Jan 2013 08:54:58 -0500, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... Do you mean the statement about heroin from the DEA or are we talking about H.R.1 YOU said that if it was a clean bill it would have "sailed through". How do you know this? That is the cite I want. Clear enough? I'll be waiting. A clean bill, simply giving money to the disaster victims would have provided the political cover they had in opposing this pork laden bill. Again, I'll ask "how do you know this"? Because a somewhat clean bill for FEMA funding just sailed through. You are even here talking about it. "somewhat clean"?? Are you kidding me??? Almost ALL of the pork is still there, and it wasn't a real reason why Boehner didn't want to vote on it anyway, he's politically motivated and didn't want is shadowing over his attempt to derail the country over the cliff. Bull**** This is the text of the whole ****ing bill that passed. H.R.41 -- To temporarily increase the borrowing authority of the Federal Emergency Management Agency for carrying out the National Flood Insurance Program. (Introduced in House - IH) HR 41 IH 113th CONGRESS 1st Session H. R. 41 To temporarily increase the borrowing authority of the Federal Emergency Management Agency for carrying out the National Flood Insurance Program. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES January 3, 2013 Mr. GARRETT (for himself, Mr. SMITH of New Jersey, Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN, Mr. LANCE, Mr. GRIMM, Mr. HANNA, Mr. KING of New York, Mr. MEEKS, Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York, Mrs. MCCARTHY of New York, Mr. CROWLEY, Mr. NADLER, Mr. ANDREWS, Mr. RUNYAN, Mr. LOBIONDO, Ms. MENG, Mr. SEAN PATRICK MALONEY of New York, Mr. PASCRELL, Mr. TONKO, and Mr. BISHOP of New York) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services, and in addition to the Committee on the Budget, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned A BILL To temporarily increase the borrowing authority of the Federal Emergency Management Agency for carrying out the National Flood Insurance Program. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. TEMPORARY INCREASE IN BORROWING AUTHORITY FOR NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM. (a) Section 1309(a) of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4016(a)) is amended by striking `$20,725,000,000' and inserting `$30,425,000,000'. (b) The amount provided by this section is designated by the Congress as an emergency requirement pursuant to section 403(a) of S. Con. Res. 13 (111th Congress), the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2010, and as an emergency pursuant to section 4(g) of the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010 (2 U.S.C. 933(g)). Figures, when the republicans block a storm sandy bill that is 65% pork, the media goes nuts... But when the republicans force the democrats to pass this bill, nobody says a word... If you are stupid enough to think this is the whole bill, I guess.... Moron. |
Hey, Scotty, what do you think about THIS:
|
Hey, Scotty, what do you think about THIS:
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:29 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com