>>>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/04/AR2009020403174.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
>>>
>>>Funny how the article doesn't mention all the pork in the bill. How is all that pork supposed to create jobs?
>>
>>nor does it mention from whom the pork comes from.
>>
>>By the by, a bi-partisan group is meeting to work on that
>
>Bi-partisan meaning - The controlling party keeps everything they want and pay off the other party with more pork. If the other party gets too much, the controlling party will have to get paid off with more pork as well.
>
>It won't get smaller. It only becomes a bigger screw.
>
>
>>
>>http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/05/stimulus/
>>
>>Please note the sentence:
>>"Sources said that in meetings on Wednesday, Obama suggested he would accept minor changes to his tax cuts, but was open to pulling more of the controversial spending projects in the bill.
>>

Should this thread be moved into the sore losers forum.