Are the members of The Freedom Caucus "rageaholics?"
Good question.
They aren't interested in a House Speaker that speaks the truth. There was no lie by Rep. McCarthy. He stated the facts. Yes?
Did they criticize his delivery? Is that the issue?
There are websites that embrace the idea of "Rageaholic." (click here) That is just one. There are others.
rageaholic (click here)
Good question.
They aren't interested in a House Speaker that speaks the truth. There was no lie by Rep. McCarthy. He stated the facts. Yes?
Did they criticize his delivery? Is that the issue?
There are websites that embrace the idea of "Rageaholic." (click here) That is just one. There are others.
rageaholic (click here)
noun
a person who gets excited by expressing rage; a person prone to extreme anger with little or no provocation
I think the observation about "Sequestration" is accurate. There was suppose to be an out from it. The Supercommittee was suppose to find cuts equivalent to it in the country's budget. Basically, the way I saw Sequestration and the Supercommittee was to cut obsolete programs which the country had no use for anymore. You can call it pork, but, there are some budgeted parts of the federal government that needs to be looked at again. The problem is that these are ten to fifteen year if not more more appropriations so there will be an impact in congressional district economies. But, obsolete is obsolete.
There are real linchpins in appropriations as well. If a program seems obsolete does it in fact support other interests benevolent to the USA? The government is a beast and it reacts in ways no one expects simply because it is so burdened by ideologies rather than effectiveness. Ideologies should be 'tested' when passing legislation to eliminate stagnant and unproductive spending.
I realize ideologies are what campaigns run on in some instances. But, and this is where The Freedom Caucus losses legitimacy. Campaigning is one thing, but, governing is different.
There is this actual priority of the elected official and goes like this, "He ran on ideologies, but, walked it back in governing." Today, that reality is viewed as disloyalty to the electorate. Ideologies can be very bizarre and they need to be reduced to a reasonable level of noise when governing in Washington.
So, where does this rageaholic come from with The Freedom Caucus? Is it legitimate? Are their priorities bizarre? DOES THE PUBLIC understand there is a group of people in the US House that is responsible for all the obstruction and dysfunction in the government. It has gotten to be ridiculous. There should never be an anarchy within the government that can call up a committee for every issue that doesn't fit into The Freedom Caucus politics. That is abuse of the taxpayer.
The deaths in Benghazi were horrible. Obviously, there were issues unseen by the USA. No one would tell the late ambassador to put his life in danger, however, there is a known component to the foreign service called "The State Department," that is dangerous. September 11th is one of them. Does everyone realize the ambassador was in a safe room when he was overcome with smoke inhalation? The late ambassador was not killed, he succumbed to the lousy smoke outside the consulate.
The committee assembled after the incident filed a report. That report cost money as the committee has a budget to carry out their investigation. The budget has to be sufficient enough for a thorough investigation so as to not inhibit the best outcome for the American people and THEIR government.
The committee submitted a report and it was transparent. It outlined changes that had to be carried out to prevent such tragedy ever again. The further priorities of the Republicans to continue to hold committee after committee is a political priority. It just is. It is a waste of money. Somehow, it is suppose cause the fall of Hillary Clinton. Why?
I think the observation about "Sequestration" is accurate. There was suppose to be an out from it. The Supercommittee was suppose to find cuts equivalent to it in the country's budget. Basically, the way I saw Sequestration and the Supercommittee was to cut obsolete programs which the country had no use for anymore. You can call it pork, but, there are some budgeted parts of the federal government that needs to be looked at again. The problem is that these are ten to fifteen year if not more more appropriations so there will be an impact in congressional district economies. But, obsolete is obsolete.
There are real linchpins in appropriations as well. If a program seems obsolete does it in fact support other interests benevolent to the USA? The government is a beast and it reacts in ways no one expects simply because it is so burdened by ideologies rather than effectiveness. Ideologies should be 'tested' when passing legislation to eliminate stagnant and unproductive spending.
I realize ideologies are what campaigns run on in some instances. But, and this is where The Freedom Caucus losses legitimacy. Campaigning is one thing, but, governing is different.
There is this actual priority of the elected official and goes like this, "He ran on ideologies, but, walked it back in governing." Today, that reality is viewed as disloyalty to the electorate. Ideologies can be very bizarre and they need to be reduced to a reasonable level of noise when governing in Washington.
So, where does this rageaholic come from with The Freedom Caucus? Is it legitimate? Are their priorities bizarre? DOES THE PUBLIC understand there is a group of people in the US House that is responsible for all the obstruction and dysfunction in the government. It has gotten to be ridiculous. There should never be an anarchy within the government that can call up a committee for every issue that doesn't fit into The Freedom Caucus politics. That is abuse of the taxpayer.
The deaths in Benghazi were horrible. Obviously, there were issues unseen by the USA. No one would tell the late ambassador to put his life in danger, however, there is a known component to the foreign service called "The State Department," that is dangerous. September 11th is one of them. Does everyone realize the ambassador was in a safe room when he was overcome with smoke inhalation? The late ambassador was not killed, he succumbed to the lousy smoke outside the consulate.
The committee assembled after the incident filed a report. That report cost money as the committee has a budget to carry out their investigation. The budget has to be sufficient enough for a thorough investigation so as to not inhibit the best outcome for the American people and THEIR government.
The committee submitted a report and it was transparent. It outlined changes that had to be carried out to prevent such tragedy ever again. The further priorities of the Republicans to continue to hold committee after committee is a political priority. It just is. It is a waste of money. Somehow, it is suppose cause the fall of Hillary Clinton. Why?
