Steny Hoyer: Boston is ‘proof’ sequestration is bad, or something

posted at 3:21 pm on April 16, 2013 by Mary Katharine Ham

He was prompted by a reporter and didn’t bring this up on his own, so there’s a bit of distinction there. The question from the reporter seems to have been the rather leading “is Boston a reason to rail on your [insert favorite political target here]?” instead of what would have been more reasonable and newsworthy— “Will sequestration affect the investigation of the attacks in Boston at all?” The answer to the second question, according to Hoyer, appears to be no, but he gets in his crass politicization first. Oddly enough, I think left-leaning outlet TPM’s headline makes it sound a bit worse than it was.

Hoyer: Boston Attack Is ‘Proof…If Proof Is Needed’ That Sequestration Is Bad

Asked by a reporter whether Monday’s attack makes the argument for addressing sequestration, Hoyer explained, “I think there are multiple reasons for ensuring that we invest in our security — both domestic and international security. That we invest in the education of our children. That we invest in growing jobs in America. And don’t pursue an irrational, across-the-board policy of cutting the highest priorities and the lowest priorities essentially the same percentage…. I think this is another proof of that — if proof is needed, which I don’t think frankly it is.”

No doubt the events in Boston are “proof” that we should have government agencies with resources to execute the feds’ number one job, which is to protect citizens. Arguably, if the government spent a lot less time and money on things that aren’t its number one job, it’d be better at this, but I digress. Is there any evidence that sequestration has actually impeded that goal in this case? After all, aren’t Democrats usually the ones longing for a return to pre-9/11 (or at least, pre-Iraq/Afghanistan) defense and intel budgets? Suddenly, a tiny cut in a bloated post-2008 budget is sure to doom us to more terrorist attacks, and an inability to prevent or solve them? Well, not exactly, as Hoyer concedes:

“I doubt that [sequestration's] having any impact presently — and the reason for that, this is a priority item and I’m sure they’re shifting what resources are necessary. Even if they’re shorter resources than they otherwise would’ve had, I’m sure they’re putting all the resources necessary on this effort. Certainly at the federal level — I think the President’s made that pretty clear.”

So, what you’re saying is that the federal government is perfectly capable of making intelligent decisions about top priorities when obvious and necessary, shifting resources from the less important treadmill-shrimp studies of the day to Boston forensics, but you would rather it not have to prioritize at all. If Hoyer is indeed worried about sequestration’s impact, now would be a good time to ask for some of the flexibility in sequestration cuts the GOP tried to give President Obama but he rejected, to maybe cancel some FBI counterterrorism furloughs and trade them out with other, less important spending.

Fail, indeed.

I wonder if he’ll have to apologize.

Also, Steve King, wait until we know whether the guy’s a foreign national, huh?

“Some of the speculation that has come out is that yes, it was a foreign national and, speculating here, that it was potentially a person on a student visa,” King says. “If that’s the case, then we need to take a look at the big picture.”

On immigration, King says national security should be the focus now, and any talk about a path to legalization should be put on hold.

“We need to be ever vigilant,” he says. “We need to go far deeper into our border crossings. . . . We need to take a look at the visa-waiver program and wonder what we’re doing. If we can’t background-check people that are coming from Saudi Arabia, how do we think we are going to background check the 11 to 20 million people that are here from who knows where?”

King’s argument about national security concerns in the immigration bill is more convincing than Hoyer’s for never, ever cutting government spending ever, but they both harm their cause by jumping on it too fast, and without the necessary facts to support their statements.

Oh, hell, let’s just turn this into a dumb exploitation thread.

Congressman Peter King (R-NY) would like to increase government surveillance of public areas even though a gajillion people had a cell phone camera running on this event at the moment, making it one of the more photographed and recorded crimes in history.

ANDREA MITCHELL: Are Americans going to have to get used to more surveillance on a daily basis?

REP. PETER KING (R-NY): I think we do because I think privacy involves being in a private location. Being out in the street is not an expectation of privacy. Anyone can look at you, can see you, can watch what you’re doing. A camera just makes it more sophisticated, but it’s no different from your neighbor looking out the window at you or a police officer looking at you walking down the street.

So I do think we need more cameras. We have to stay ahead of the terrorists and I do know in New York, the Lower Manhattan Security Initiative, which is based on cameras, the outstanding work that results from that. So yes, I do favor more cameras. They’re a great law enforcement method and device. And again, it keeps us ahead of the terrorists, who are constantly trying to kill us.

And, our old pal Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA). He doesn’t quite go so far as to make the argument that the destruction wrought in Boston will be stimulative for the economy, but I’m sure that will come from someone. What he does say is this:

CNN HOST: What are your impressions of the response in Boston so far?”

FRANK: “I’m glad you raised that, because it gives me a chance to make a point I’ve felt strongly about,” said Frank. “In this terrible situation, let’s be very grateful that we had a well-funded, functioning government. It is very fashionable in America, and has been for some time to criticize government, belittle public employees, talk about their pensions, talk about what people think … of [their] health care. Here we saw government in two ways perform very well. … I never was as a member of Congress one of the cheerleaders for less government, lower taxes. No tax cut would have helped us deal with this or will help us recover. This is very expensive.”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

These dems are such asshats…..

I saw no shortage of cops in Boston…..

DHS is just incompetent – no matter how much money they have.

redguy on April 16, 2013 at 3:23 PM

Wow.

What a jerk.

JohnTant on April 16, 2013 at 3:23 PM

This guy is such a jackass.

It takes a tragedy to really weed out who the opportunists are, doesn’t it?

portlandon on April 16, 2013 at 3:23 PM

More Feral government please!

trs on April 16, 2013 at 3:23 PM

No tax cut would have helped us deal with this or will help us recover.

Wrong again Bawney – Just see what Reagan did have the disaster that was Jimmy Carter…

redguy on April 16, 2013 at 3:25 PM

The fact is that the government WAS there conducting a bomb drill and bomb-sniffing dogs were used BEFORE the bombs went off. Neither Big Government nor bomb-sniffing dogs were able to stop it from occurring.

As Margaret Thatcher said following the IRA attack on the Grand Hotel in Brighton, which nearly killed her:

‘Terrorists only have to be lucky once, we have to be lucky all the time.’

There will NEVER be a big enough government to prevent every terrorist attack. Never.

Resist We Much on April 16, 2013 at 3:26 PM

So I guess “it’s Bush’s fault” has finally hit its expiration date then?

So fvcking idiots like this turd can employ the “s” excuse for the balance of O’Butthead’s term?

ICanSeeNovFromMyHouse on April 16, 2013 at 3:27 PM

Hey “nonpartisan”. Try to defend this jagoff.

22044 on April 16, 2013 at 3:27 PM

So Obama passes sequester, then tries to get republicans to defeat it, they go along and now Obama’s sequester is bad but it really is those pesky republicans sequester. I see, so predictable, anyone not seeing this a mile away is an idiot

Conservative4ev on April 16, 2013 at 3:27 PM

If ever there was proof that your basic garden variety career politician occupies a plane of reality that is completely separate from the one you and I happen to be on, this is it!

pilamaye on April 16, 2013 at 3:28 PM

Crass politicization, A-Hoyer!

Clinically insane would be moire like it. And so is Obama as Axlerod says Obvama thinks it was because of Tax Day and someone not wanting to pay his ‘fair share’.

VorDaj on April 16, 2013 at 3:30 PM

Boy, it didn’t take long for the vultures to come out and blame everything on the r’s for not giving bho all his evil heart desires did it?

This guy is just one of many on the tube saying this type of krap today!
L

letget on April 16, 2013 at 3:31 PM

Clearly, more obamaphones would have stopped the attack. Damn rethugs./s

Howcome on April 16, 2013 at 3:32 PM

And this proves Hoyer is an hopeless, unmitigated idiot.

rplat on April 16, 2013 at 3:32 PM

sick. sick man

tom daschle concerned on April 16, 2013 at 3:34 PM

Hoyer is a jerk, and King needs to shut up. I do not want cameras on ever street corner with little government weasels sitting in darkened rooms watching my every move, thanks very much.

Othniel on April 16, 2013 at 3:34 PM

Frank used it to beg for more money also. I was very impressed with how quickly the 9/11 highjackers were made public, I expect the same thing now but with arrests. It’s hard to imagine you can have that much public and private video and not get some answers.

Cindy Munford on April 16, 2013 at 3:35 PM

Peter King is approaching DEFCON-McCAIN level for me.

Resist We Much on April 16, 2013 at 3:36 PM

So, what you’re saying is that the federal government is perfectly capable of making intelligent decisions about top priorities when obvious and necessary, shifting resources from the less important treadmill-shrimp studies of the day to Boston forensics, but you would rather it not have to prioritize at all.

You are giving him way too much credit. You rationalized him. What he actually did was answer both yes and no, in a sequence. Whatever worked. He tried “yes” and lamented s., then tried “not really” and said Obama was being wise with the money.

He ran both sides of his mouth, basically.

Axe on April 16, 2013 at 3:36 PM

But the President said, “At times like this there are no Democrats or Republicans, just Americans.” I guess the ran out.

bflat879 on April 16, 2013 at 3:36 PM

Amazing how after these many years, the liberties that the bifactional ruling party destroyed for (the illusion of) security, the massive bureaucracy that is the DHS and its creepy surveillance state, and the billions spent, the state failed again.

I guess the FBI is too busy foiling its own terrorist plots, and the DHS is more concerned with the Constitutionalist threat (aka right wing extremists) than stopping actual terrorists.

Rae on April 16, 2013 at 3:37 PM

Who’s up for banning Stupid?

LetsBfrank on April 16, 2013 at 3:38 PM

There will NEVER be a big enough government to prevent every terrorist attack. Never.

Resist We Much on April 16, 2013 at 3:26 PM

Maybe you can get us pulled back from the “if it saves one child, it’s worth it” cliff, but it’s a long way from here, where we are now, back to there, where you’re arguing. :)

Axe on April 16, 2013 at 3:38 PM

Steny Hoyer: Boston is ‘proof’ sequestration is bad, or something

Only if it turns out that whoever is behind this was one of the detainees that was let go because of the sequestration furlough snit.

Lily on April 16, 2013 at 3:40 PM

He was prompted by a reporter and didn’t bring this up on his own, so there’s a bit of distinction there

I love how conservatives nearly always give the lefty the benefit of the doubt, while lefties nearly always construe conservatives in the worst possible light. And by ‘love’ I mean I am disappointed.

Fenris on April 16, 2013 at 3:40 PM

Steny, Bill Ayers and Kathy Boudin would probably disagree with you.

ndanielson on April 16, 2013 at 3:41 PM

Idiot

cmsinaz on April 16, 2013 at 3:42 PM

How does sequestration affect the Boston Police Department?

rbj on April 16, 2013 at 3:42 PM

It ain’t news, but, our political system attracts neither the intelligent, or the honorable.

M240H on April 16, 2013 at 3:42 PM

If it wasn’t for sequestration, DHS agents would have got those in- services on pressure cookers.

mwbri on April 16, 2013 at 3:43 PM

Who’s up for banning Stupid?

LetsBfrank on April 16, 2013 at 3:38 PM

And registering pressure cookers?

ndanielson on April 16, 2013 at 3:43 PM

Idiot

cmsinaz on April 16, 2013 at 3:42 PM

Seconded.

Turtle317 on April 16, 2013 at 3:43 PM

On Security:

1. To Secure a Country and its people first you must secure the borders.

2. Marines setting up a base camp, the preminter must be secured.

3. Leave the door open it will be used.

Of some note as the lame know nothing U.S. Senate and Democrats in the House lust for the wage and vote slaves, others use the wide open doors.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/trial-start-zetas-cartel-racehorse-case=18948003?page=2

Facts like this will not go away, the head chopping will not just stop itself, the crimes will grow, the danger will increse, the deaths will follow, the druge use will grow, the rule of law will waste away, all for what?

The evil lust of the two party evil money cult in power in Washington D.C..

They do not care for US as they should.

Fire them, hire ourselves, clean house.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on April 16, 2013 at 3:44 PM

All these jackholes are traitors and really responsible for this. (in my opinion)

johnny reb on April 16, 2013 at 3:44 PM

With you there rwm @3:36

cmsinaz on April 16, 2013 at 3:44 PM

I wonder if democrats are born stupid, or if it’s a choice…. Sort of like… LOL

dpduq on April 16, 2013 at 3:46 PM

So the obvious course of action is to use some sequestration money to set up a pressure cooker registry?

ndanielson on April 16, 2013 at 3:47 PM

Steny used to be my member of Congress…was an ignoramus then, still is.

Steny…wasn’t “sequestration” an Obama idea? Wasn’t it spawned because Barry did not/could not make a decision, let alone champion a budget?

Well, Barry, your man, got his wish.

Got a complaint?

You know where 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue is.

coldwarrior on April 16, 2013 at 3:47 PM

It ain’t news, but, our political system attracts neither the intelligent, or the honorable.

M240H on April 16, 2013 at 3:42 PM

“Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself.”
–Mark Twain

“Any one who has been continuously wrong for twelve years is just wasting his time outside our national capital.”
–Isabel Paterson

“It is inaccurate to say that I hate everything. I am strongly in favor of common sense, common honesty, and common decency. This makes me forever ineligible for public office.”
–H. L. Mencken

Rae on April 16, 2013 at 3:48 PM

Or maybe it’s proof that democratic jackwads can’t spend an EXTRA 1 trillion dollars a year reasonably

WryTrvllr on April 16, 2013 at 3:48 PM

dpdug @ 3:46

You’ve got to be a moron now-a-days to believe any politician.

johnny reb on April 16, 2013 at 3:49 PM

ok, so let’s restore all the cuts that were made to the military and law enforcement.

blue13326 on April 16, 2013 at 3:50 PM

LIBERAL DEMOCRATS…

… The skid on the toilet bowl.

Seven Percent Solution on April 16, 2013 at 3:50 PM

Translation: PAY ATTENTION TO ME! I’M IMPORTANT, I MATTER! I AM RELEVANT!

Pffft!

Liam on April 16, 2013 at 3:51 PM

Let’s quit giving billions to Egypt, Pakistan, Syria etc., etc., etc.

johnny reb on April 16, 2013 at 3:51 PM

Our gubment probably financed this with all the give-aways to the muzzie brotherhood.

johnny reb on April 16, 2013 at 3:53 PM

So I do think we need more cameras

It also assumes that we can trust the government not to misuse these camera’s. Current facts on the record won’t support that trust.

chemman on April 16, 2013 at 3:54 PM

Maybe Nappy will use all those bullets that she’s buying to protect us!

johnny reb on April 16, 2013 at 3:55 PM

Must be, because nothing like this happened before sequestration.

elifino on April 16, 2013 at 3:56 PM

“Don’t jump to conclusion, rubes”.

Schadenfreude on April 16, 2013 at 3:57 PM

Only if it turns out that whoever is behind this was one of the detainees that was let go because of the sequestration furlough snit.

Lily on April 16, 2013 at 3:40 PM

That would only be proof that the government intended to harm us not that the sequester was bad.

chemman on April 16, 2013 at 3:57 PM

Peter King is approaching DEFCON-McCAIN level for me.

Resist We Much on April 16, 2013 at 3:36 PM

He has transitioned into and utter moron. Might as well switch parties.

Schadenfreude on April 16, 2013 at 3:58 PM

Moron.

Badger40 on April 16, 2013 at 3:59 PM

ok, so let’s restore all the cuts that were made to the military and law enforcement.

blue13326 on April 16, 2013 at 3:50 PM

What cuts…?

Seven Percent Solution on April 16, 2013 at 3:59 PM

It’s obvious we need a universal background check before anyone can buy a pressure cooker.

Wigglesworth on April 16, 2013 at 3:59 PM

So the obvious course of action is to use some sequestration money to set up a pressure cooker registry?

ndanielson on April 16, 2013 at 3:47 PM

Mental health screening for cooks. Common sense limits on ingredients. 1 pressure cooker / household.

LetsBfrank on April 16, 2013 at 4:02 PM

FYI all, his name is Abdul Rahman Ali Alharbi a Saudi who lists members of the royal saudi family as friends on his Facebook page.

jake49 on April 16, 2013 at 3:45 PM

In all fairness, there are about 15,000 members of the House of Saud. Not kidding.

That’s what happens when you can have multiple wives.

Resist We Much on April 16, 2013 at 4:02 PM

Resist We Much on April 16, 2013 at 4:02 PM

Wrong thread. Sorry.

Resist We Much on April 16, 2013 at 4:02 PM

ok, so let’s restore all the cuts that were made to the military and law enforcement.

blue13326 on April 16, 2013 at 3:50 PM

7% is right the only cut was they didn’t get as big an increase as they thought they should. They still have more money to spend this FY than in the last FY.

chemman on April 16, 2013 at 4:03 PM

What terrorist plots has the US government thwarted in the last 4 years? Sorry, but an FBI agent pretending to be a Jihadi with a fake bomb that convinces some wannabee to plant it somewhere doesn’t count.

Wigglesworth on April 16, 2013 at 4:03 PM

Peter King is approaching DEFCON-McCAIN level for me.

Resist We Much on April 16, 2013 at 3:36 PM

He has transitioned into and utter moron. Might as well switch parties.

Schadenfreude on April 16, 2013 at 3:58 PM

Both of them.

Resist We Much on April 16, 2013 at 4:03 PM

Typical ignorant liberal.
I know, redundant.

RovesChins on April 16, 2013 at 4:03 PM

Hoyer is still alive? Wow. I guess one can live longer by feasting on the souls of Christians, aborted babies, and crushed American dreams.

madmonkphotog on April 16, 2013 at 4:06 PM

If you want to do some politicization, how about this: The ‘Boston Massacre’ which has dominated the news media 24/7 produced no more casualties than an average IED blast in Afghanistan which gets TOTALLY IGNORED except for the obligatory snippet on page 33 beneath the Viagra ad.

MaiDee on April 16, 2013 at 4:14 PM

but it’s no different from your neighbor looking out the window at you or a police officer looking at you walking down the street.

So I do think we need more cameras.

Okay, Peter King now claiming that constant surveillance via camera (ultimately producing a record) is equal to just seeing someone outside?

He is not one of us. Google taking a 2nd look though.

LetsBfrank on April 16, 2013 at 4:16 PM

Our federal budgets would be in much better shape, with no need for sequestration, had Bahney Fwank not screwed up the mortgage market with CRA-inspired cheap loans for the democratic party grifter class.

slickwillie2001 on April 16, 2013 at 4:19 PM

Exactly as I predicted on another HA article. These guys are so inbriated with the success of their past multitudes of crass and unbelievable lies that they keep reaching down to find the edge of Hades. There is no longer any truth that can’t be corrupted by their immoral souls.

The GOP (lib-lite) could actually fund the next election by compiling the absurdities they tell and writing them into a reality show–”Liars Dynasty” or something.

I’m still waiting for Obama to blame some pro-Christian movie (pre-1960) as having triggered this act.

Don L on April 16, 2013 at 4:22 PM

Our federal budgets would be in much better shape, with no need for sequestration, had Bahney Fwank not screwed up the mortgage market with CRA-inspired cheap loans for the democratic party grifter class.

slickwillie2001 on April 16, 2013 at 4:19 PM

Hey, they’re back at that game again. they just love the way it destroys economies–big time!

Don L on April 16, 2013 at 4:24 PM

Okay, Peter King now claiming that constant surveillance via camera (ultimately producing a record) is equal to just seeing someone outside?

He is not one of us. Google taking a 2nd look though.

LetsBfrank on April 16, 2013 at 4:16 PM

On the IRA, Peter King said:

“We must pledge ourselves to support those brave men and women who this very moment are carrying forth the struggle against British imperialism in the streets of Belfast and Derry.”

- Congressman Peter King, 1982

“If civilians are killed in an attack on a military installation, it is certainly regrettable, but I will not morally blame the I.R.A. for it.”

- Congressman Peter King, 1985

“I’m the Ollie North of Ireland.”

- Congressman Peter King, 1987

“The moral standing of the IRA is equal to that of the British army.”

- Congressman Peter King, 1995

A judge in Belfast once threw King out of the courtroom because ‘[King] was an obvious collaborator with the IRA.’

He often stayed at the home of a senior IRA militant who ran operations in Belfast and was a welcome guest at the Felons Club, a heavily fortified drinking establishment for former IRA prisoners in West Belfast, according to Ed Moloney, author of “A Secret History of the IRA,” and a review of Irish and Irish American press accounts of King’s trips.

Peter King said: “The British government is a murder machine” and described the IRA, which mastered the car bomb as an instrument of urban terror, as a “legitimate force.” And he compared Gerry Adams, the leader of Sinn Fein, the IRA’s political wing, to George Washington.

Resist We Much on April 16, 2013 at 4:26 PM

Some a-holes will only understand a solid punch to the nose. Hoyer is one.

ultracon on April 16, 2013 at 4:27 PM

Crass, stupid, classless a$$hattery is the hallmark of the Democrat party and the liberal left.

Midas on April 16, 2013 at 4:28 PM

Hoyer looks like he’s checking his teeth for spinach in that picture.

slickwillie2001 on April 16, 2013 at 4:33 PM

Steny Hoyer: Boston is ‘proof’ sequestration is bad, or something

Further proof that being ignorant and stupid are tickets to leadership positions in the Democrat Party.

RJL on April 16, 2013 at 5:01 PM

Hoyer looks like he’s checking his teeth for spinach in that picture.

slickwillie2001 on April 16, 2013 at 4:33 PM

Actually he’s showing Bark his dentures to prove that his teeth can come out and that there won’t be any biting when he services him.

Bishop on April 16, 2013 at 5:02 PM

REP. PETER KING (R-NY): I think we do because I think privacy involves being in a private location. Being out in the street is not an expectation of privacy. Anyone can look at you, can see you, can watch what you’re doing. A camera just makes it more sophisticated, but it’s no different from your neighbor looking out the window at you or a police officer looking at you walking down the street.

As long as were at it, we should ban curtains like NorK does. If you aren’t plotting some nefarious activity, why do you need to hide behind drapes?

In fact, why don’t we install cameras in each and every household so that the moment a crime is committed, the central government can order all persons to assemble before the camera, and anyone absent is obviously guilty of the crime.

Or, there’s always this. “wrong answer”

BobMbx on April 16, 2013 at 5:14 PM

Dems, always on point, always making one…..no matter what shame the average person would feel if attempting it in a time like this.

itsspideyman on April 16, 2013 at 5:27 PM

We have spent give or take a trillion or 2 dollars since 9-11 to protect the country with every tool available and we get our a$$es handed to us by bombs made from materials you can buy at the Dollar Store.The government can’t protect us after all.This makes the fight for the 2nd amendment even more important.We have to protect ourselves ,not rely on them.

docflash on April 16, 2013 at 5:35 PM

we are in good hands

rob verdi on April 16, 2013 at 5:37 PM

Every time a disaster or crisis happens…the Federal Government shows how completely inept, over-funded, redundant, useless and worthless they are. …Hell, this time even the politicians are outright SAYING it, From Barney Frank’s disgusting sewer-hole: ““In this terrible situation, let’s be very grateful that we had a well-funded, functioning government.”

….That had more money than it ever wanted and STILL can’t protect you for one split-second.

and ” No tax cut would have helped us deal with this or will help us recover. This is very expensive.”

WHAT is expensive, Barney? Doing nothing but running around like retards, for years after the event trying to decipher who the hell DID this, while you STILL couldn’t stop them?

This Government is a complete sham. They can NOT protect you, EVER! Their assistance after the tragedy will be woefully lacking, at best. They are NOTHING but a self-perpetuating, money-printing, endless, empty promise machine.

Reagan was right, “Government IS the problem”

My God in Heaven, when will America wake up?

a5minmajor on April 16, 2013 at 5:55 PM

As Margaret Thatcher said following the IRA attack on the Grand Hotel in Brighton, which nearly killed her:

‘Terrorists only have to be lucky once, we have to be lucky all the time.’

There will NEVER be a big enough government to prevent every terrorist attack. Never.

Resist We Much on April 16, 2013 at 3:26 PM

Indeed.

AesopFan on April 16, 2013 at 6:10 PM

BREAKING NEWS:

Letter that has tested positive three times for Ricin was sent to Republican Senator Roger Wicker of Mississippi.

Resist We Much on April 16, 2013 at 6:38 PM

It is now certain we are only one more huge tax increase away from peace in our time.

diogenes on April 16, 2013 at 6:39 PM

Steny can always be counted upon to be a Maroon!

Another Drew on April 16, 2013 at 7:22 PM

Bets on how long it will take for them to pass a bill funneling money to Boston for “security, restoration, cleanup, whatever thing they can think of”?

I say less than a month. And it will have a spiffy name. Something along the lines of Boston Security Act of 2013.

ButterflyDragon on April 16, 2013 at 8:19 PM

ask hoyer why obama cut home bomb deterrent funding 9 million? and why he didn’t bit%h then?

oh, never mind, you won’t get an answer.

losarkos on April 17, 2013 at 11:07 AM