@dl211, go examine these comments, you made the first remark that addressed a clipper and not the individuals in said clip. From the other clippers around here I would expect a response addressing the amount of money wasted by the Bush administration in Iraq compared to a paltry amount spent on decoration. However since you have arrived you give up the intellect immediately and go for the personal. Bravo brainiac, don't over tax yourself you, you don't want to kill of the few remaining brain cells you have left.

@jatfla

You know your repeated comments about the effectiveness of this congress is a joke. We already posted the number of legislative pieces passed by the preceding "do nothing",...

@dl211, go examine these comments, you made the first remark that addressed a clipper and not the individuals in said clip. From the other clippers around here I would expect a response addressing the amount of money wasted by the Bush administration in Iraq compared to a paltry amount spent on decoration. However since you have arrived you give up the intellect immediately and go for the personal. Bravo brainiac, don't over tax yourself you, you don't want to kill of the few remaining brain cells you have left.

@jatfla

You know your repeated comments about the effectiveness of this congress is a joke. We already posted the number of legislative pieces passed by the preceding "do nothing", work 3 days a week Republican Congress (on top of the fact that Repubs controlled all 3 branches of government at the time).

Then you have the likes of Tom Coburn in Oklahoma putting personal holds on legislation so it cannot proceed, multiple procedural cloture votes by the Republicans. What you see is a stalling uncompromising Republican legislature. Pot calling the kettle black.

The House of Representatives met for only 101 days in session during the second session of the 109th Congress. The Senate met for only 138 days in session during the second session of the 109th Congress. Thus the House set the record for the fewest days in session in one year since the end of World War II. When the Repubs lost control in 2006 they left office without passing any funding legislation, none, zip, nada.

Regardless of Senator Coburn's intent, it seems to go against the designs of the U.S. government to halt debate on a particular issue before all of the elected representatives because it doesn't mesh with your personal standard. This is obstructionism. (More on Coburn later).

No earmarks can match the financial windfall that Bush donors have received in non-competitive contracts in the Iraq fiasco

Back to Coburn (from one of his states major newspapers no less - Tulsa World).

U.S. Sen. Tom Coburn once again served notice he will try to derail legislation that fails to meet his requirements, a move a t...

Regardless of Senator Coburn's intent, it seems to go against the designs of the U.S. government to halt debate on a particular issue before all of the elected representatives because it doesn't mesh with your personal standard. This is obstructionism. (More on Coburn later).

No earmarks can match the financial windfall that Bush donors have received in non-competitive contracts in the Iraq fiasco

Back to Coburn (from one of his states major newspapers no less - Tulsa World).

U.S. Sen. Tom Coburn once again served notice he will try to derail legislation that fails to meet his requirements, a move a top leadership aide dismissed Wednesday as a stunt that will tire even the Oklahoman’s fellow Republicans.

In a Dec. 4 letter, Coburn also seemed to indicate all other senators should submit their bills for his review to avoid his objection. (How unselfcentered of him, my remark). Link

Then, Coburn appears to set himself up as a one-man clearinghouse for bills pushed by all other senators.

“If you intend to seek unanimous consent for any legislation in the next three weeks, I would encourage you to contact me as soon as possible so I have sufficient time to read and review your bill or bills and we can work out any differences, avoiding the frustration of last minute, late night negotiations,” he writes.

Without singling out specific senators, several Democrats took to the floor Wednesday to respond to Republicans’ efforts to hold up action on specific bills by objecting to unanimous consent requests.

Such moves force Democratic leaders to file so-called cloture motions on individual bills. Those motions take several days to ripen.

There are no liberal public papers in the state of Oklahoma. There's conservative and ultra-conservative. And Tulsa World is number 2 in circulation (well maybe number 3, Dallas Morning News might sell more than The Daily Oklahoman and Tulsa World).

N2, it's obvious you didn't read the article because Coburn wants all Senators to pass their proposed bills to him for his inspection and approval before they go to debate. He isn't looking for debate.

U.S. Sen. Tom Coburn once again served notice he will try to derail legislation that fails to meet his requirements, a move a top leadership aide dismissed Wednesday as a stunt that will tire even the Oklahoman’s fellow Republicans.[/quote...

There are no liberal public papers in the state of Oklahoma. There's conservative and ultra-conservative. And Tulsa World is number 2 in circulation (well maybe number 3, Dallas Morning News might sell more than The Daily Oklahoman and Tulsa World).

N2, it's obvious you didn't read the article because Coburn wants all Senators to pass their proposed bills to him for his inspection and approval before they go to debate. He isn't looking for debate.

U.S. Sen. Tom Coburn once again served notice he will try to derail legislation that fails to meet his requirements, a move a top leadership aide dismissed Wednesday as a stunt that will tire even the Oklahoman’s fellow Republicans.

In a Dec. 4 letter, Coburn also seemed to indicate all other senators should submit their bills for his review to avoid his objection.

That would be good. Then the Patriot Act never would never have been passed. His remarks would hold water if he was not doing this for some time however. He also uses it as a method to kill legislation that he doesn't like.

He has done this to 90 other bills.........prior to this session end period. Nice try.

Five years ago, Virginia Graeme Baker, the 7-year-old granddaughter of former secretary of state James A. Baker III, drowned at a pool party in McLean when she was pulled underwater by the force of a hot-tub drain.

Simple safety measures like a raised drain cover could have saved her life. And in the years since her death, her mother, Nancy Baker, has pursued fed...

read more»

That would be good. Then the Patriot Act never would never have been passed. His remarks would hold water if he was not doing this for some time however. He also uses it as a method to kill legislation that he doesn't like.

He has done this to 90 other bills.........prior to this session end period. Nice try.

Five years ago, Virginia Graeme Baker, the 7-year-old granddaughter of former secretary of state James A. Baker III, drowned at a pool party in McLean when she was pulled underwater by the force of a hot-tub drain.

Simple safety measures like a raised drain cover could have saved her life. And in the years since her death, her mother, Nancy Baker, has pursued federal legislation that would give states an incentive to change building codes to require those safety features.

The culmination of those efforts, the Virginia Graeme Baker Pool and Spa Safety Act, passed the House in October and was on the brink of becoming law last month. But in a twist that could happen only in Washington, the measure has run aground -- an unlikely victim of a senator's crusade against wasteful government spending.

Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), a physician and a fiscal conservative, thwarted two recent attempts in the Senate to pass the bill by unanimous consent by placing a hold on it, as he has done with a total of 95 bills because they authorize new spending without offsets elsewhere in the federal budget.

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.), the bill's original House sponsor, described Coburn's action as "callous."

"We can prevent [drownings]," she said. "Now there is one person standing in the way."

And the bill's goals were hard to criticize: reducing the incidence of drowning, which is the second-leading cause of accidental death for children younger than 14, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said.

Cost of this bill $7 million dollars over 5 years.
Whatever

Well once again your recollections are inaccurate (unless you want to clarify "these stunts"). Coburn tried to attach an amendment to the Highway Bill where Republican Ted Stevens had his pork barrel project. The amendment was allowed to be debated and voted on (no one held it up with a technical maneuver). Furthermore the Republican Congress didn't remove the money, they still included it, removing the provisos for the bridges, but allowing Alaska to decide on how they wanted to spend the money. Therefore when the project died it was at the hands of the Alaska State Government not the Republican Congress.

In typical hypocritical fashion Tom Coburn complained about Senator Stevens putting a...

Well once again your recollections are inaccurate (unless you want to clarify "these stunts"). Coburn tried to attach an amendment to the Highway Bill where Republican Ted Stevens had his pork barrel project. The amendment was allowed to be debated and voted on (no one held it up with a technical maneuver). Furthermore the Republican Congress didn't remove the money, they still included it, removing the provisos for the bridges, but allowing Alaska to decide on how they wanted to spend the money. Therefore when the project died it was at the hands of the Alaska State Government not the Republican Congress.

In typical hypocritical fashion Tom Coburn complained about Senator Stevens putting a hold on a bill of his as revenge (imagine that Tom Coburn complaining about smeone putting a hold on his bill).

You seem to forget all together that the 109th Congress was controlled by Republicans. Legislation flows out of committees controlled by Republicans. There wasn't extensive filibustering by Democrats as the Republicans threatened to legislate the filibuster out of existence. Republicans did nothing by their own choice choosing to work only 3 days of the week.

I find no articles of any Senator, Republican or Democrat, having the arrogance to pull what Coburn is pulling and I challenge you to find it. Other Senators have commented that work would come to a standstill if everyone chose to act like Coburn.

A historical side note: The Democrats are responsible for ending the requirement of a super majority vote being required to end a filibuster. It use to take 64 votes and that was almost impossible. Democrats reduced it to 60, not Republicans.

This has become so petty. How did Tom Coburn become the focus of these comments? If I recall, the original clip was about Nancy Pelosi. Tom Coburn is NOT the problem. The problem is that our representatives will spend all that they can spend if there is no oversight. Tom Coburn is only one person. He is not all powerful. Is he using congressional rules and regulations to attempt to stop overspending? Yes. Is he successful? No. There is still tons of "pork". I, for one, am tired of type of "pork" spending. George Bush was tired of this spending too. This is one reason why George Bush wanted the line item veto.

One could argue that, "Well, it is only a few billion." I say that a...

This has become so petty. How did Tom Coburn become the focus of these comments? If I recall, the original clip was about Nancy Pelosi. Tom Coburn is NOT the problem. The problem is that our representatives will spend all that they can spend if there is no oversight. Tom Coburn is only one person. He is not all powerful. Is he using congressional rules and regulations to attempt to stop overspending? Yes. Is he successful? No. There is still tons of "pork". I, for one, am tired of type of "pork" spending. George Bush was tired of this spending too. This is one reason why George Bush wanted the line item veto.

One could argue that, "Well, it is only a few billion." I say that a few billion here and a few billion there and pretty soon it adds up to real money.

I see people in government having an entitlement mentality. I don't have a problem with differing views about spending *for* the needs of the American people or debates as to how our taxes are to be allocated. What I do have a problem with is how they use their offices (even from the local level way down here) to enrich themselves and exult their sense of status. It's probably a subtle (or not so subtle) trap that most all fall into. It's like a teenager given his Dad's credit card with the Dad's good-faith entrustment.

The list of such spending is huge. It could be flowers, or round-the-world trips, or offices, or staff, whatever.... Our elected officials, in my opinion, are well sal...

I see people in government having an entitlement mentality. I don't have a problem with differing views about spending *for* the needs of the American people or debates as to how our taxes are to be allocated. What I do have a problem with is how they use their offices (even from the local level way down here) to enrich themselves and exult their sense of status. It's probably a subtle (or not so subtle) trap that most all fall into. It's like a teenager given his Dad's credit card with the Dad's good-faith entrustment.

The list of such spending is huge. It could be flowers, or round-the-world trips, or offices, or staff, whatever.... Our elected officials, in my opinion, are well salaried to fulfill their duties as our representatives. It's the temptations of material lust and greed that sully their character.

I did not clip the part above because it was not exactly relevant to the title. That's all.

I don't think Pelosi should have blown 16K on flower nore do I believe that ANY member of this administration whether Republican or Democrat waste our money. You keep stating Republican this or that. So what? Are you saying that if Democrats waste our money that it is not really wasted because they are Democrats?

I just clipped a message where $610 million was wasted at the U.N. This was neither Democrat or Republican. We also don't need bridges in Alaska for 60? people nor do we need spend all this money on pork projects on both side of the aisle.

This stuff has to stop and the finger pointi...

I did not clip the part above because it was not exactly relevant to the title. That's all.

I don't think Pelosi should have blown 16K on flower nore do I believe that ANY member of this administration whether Republican or Democrat waste our money. You keep stating Republican this or that. So what? Are you saying that if Democrats waste our money that it is not really wasted because they are Democrats?

I just clipped a message where $610 million was wasted at the U.N. This was neither Democrat or Republican. We also don't need bridges in Alaska for 60? people nor do we need spend all this money on pork projects on both side of the aisle.

This stuff has to stop and the finger pointing has to stop too. There is too much favoritism and it is because our Congressmen and women are buying it!

There was a study that about Presidential candidate Huckaby that stated something to the effect that people that donated the most money got political favors of different types. Duh? Who would have guessed.

The point is that this whole mess is costing our country a bundle and it really has to stop--Republican and Democrats.

My contention would be that if you feel both parties are equally guilty of wasting money your clip title would not have been skewed towards highlighting only the Democratic Speaker of the House. You would have included a reference to Republican spending. I challenge you to clip an article stating the record governmental spending of the Republican controleed 109th Congress, if you're making the statement that you are fair and balanced.

Some other parts of the article that were not clipped:

Most of the $16,058 that Pelosi charged taxpayers for flowers, Elshami said, was for the visits of foreign dignitaries, such as Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, French President Nicolas Sarkozy...

My contention would be that if you feel both parties are equally guilty of wasting money your clip title would not have been skewed towards highlighting only the Democratic Speaker of the House. You would have included a reference to Republican spending. I challenge you to clip an article stating the record governmental spending of the Republican controleed 109th Congress, if you're making the statement that you are fair and balanced.

Some other parts of the article that were not clipped:

Most of the $16,058 that Pelosi charged taxpayers for flowers, Elshami said, was for the visits of foreign dignitaries, such as Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, French President Nicolas Sarkozy and Jordan’s King Abdullah.

“Many of the same dignitaries and international leaders hosted by the White House … are also hosted by Speaker Pelosi,” Elshami said. “This expense is associated largely with these occasions and other Congress-wide, bipartisan events”

Pelosi has more people working for her. Hastert employed 35 people during the third quarter of last year. Pelosi, by contrast, had 51 people on her payroll during the same time period.

“As the first Democratic Speaker in 12 years, there was a responsibility to the American people and the Democratic Caucus to hit the ground running and to pass the New Direction agenda,” Elshami said. “To achieve this goal, more resources were needed, including the hiring of additional staff in policy and research areas, for example.”

The biggest percentage decrease was for the Democratic Steering and Policy Committee, run by Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.). The committee spent 28 percent less this year.