Uhm?? Jonathan? The links are not bad, but let me get more specific for you. You were correct on the 1994 Vote for the 1995 HEW & Labor Appropriations, I missed that one, but here is a breakdown of that bill:
Highlights: - Indicates that a student can be eligible for no more than $2,340 for a Pell Grant in a year. - Sets a fine of up to $20,000, a prison sentence of up to 10 years or both for a HIV positive person who knowingly attempts to sell or donate bodily fluids. - Prohibits fund from being used to force students to be bussed on account of race, creed or color. - Bans the use of funds to prevent programs of voluntary prayer in school. - Prohibits funds from being used to implement a needle exchange program unless the Surgeon General finds that such programs are effective in preventing the spread of HIV and does not encourage the use of illegal drugs. * $209.93 billion for the Department of Health and Human Services, including: * - $89.69 billion for grants to States for Medicaid. - $33.16 billion for the Administration for Children and Families (ACF). - $28.29 billion for the Supplemental Security Income program. - $11.33 billion for the National Institutes of Health. * $27.43 billion for the Department of Education, including: * - $7.7 billion for student financial assistance. - $7.23 billion for education for the disadvantaged. - $3.25 billion for special education. * $9.76 billion for the Department of Labor, including: * - $5.51 billion for training and employment services. Link to Legislation: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c103:hr4606: ======================= This stat that you posted, purportedly "12.9 billion on 09-29-1993, including $2.5 Billion To Russia" didn't happen. Here is the Bill that passed, for $13.51 Billion, and that Gingrich voted for. Note that there was no funds alotted to Russia. The $12.9 Billion that alotted money to Russia, Gingrich voted "Nay" and the Bill did not pass: http://www.votesmart.org/issue_keyvote_detail.php?cs_id=8544&can_id=26821 Project Vote Smart's Synopsis: *Vote to pass a bill that appropriates $13.51 billion for foreign operations, export financing, and related programs for fiscal year 1994.* Highlights: - Prohibits use of funds for abortions as a method of family planning, or for any program or organization that motivates or coerces any individual to practice abortion, or performs involuntary sterilizations - Excludes Cuba, Iraq, Libya, Vietnam, Iran, Serbia, Sudan, and Syria from any federal funding - Bars bilateral assistance funds to any nation that supports terrorism or provides a haven for terrorists - Prohibits funds to any nation that refuses to comply with the United Nations-imposed sanctions against Iraq, unless the President determines that the provided funds are used in the national interest of the U.S. or benefits the people of Iraq - Prohibits funds from being used to pay for assessments, arrearages, or dues for any United Nations member - Bans funds to any government that supplies "lethal military equipment" to any nation supporting international terrorism - Prohibits funding from programs that entice businesses to relocate outside the U.S. and decrease the number of American employees - $6.13 billion for the Agency for International Development, including $2.36 billion for the economic support fund, $811.9 million for the development assistance fund, and $603.82 million for assistance to new independent states of the former Soviet Union - $3.15 billion for the foreign military financing program - $835.19 million for the State Department, including $670.69 million for migration and refugee assistance, $100 million for international narcotics control - $360.63 million for international organizations and programs - $219.75 million for the Peace Corps Link to Legislation: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c103:hr2295: Full Text of Legislation <http://www.votesmart.org/billtext/8081.pdf> (PDF Document) <http://www.votesmart.org/billtext/8081.pdf> *House Passage:* 06/17/1993 : Bill Passed: 309 - 111<http://www.votesmart.org/issue_keyvote_detail.php?cs_id=8081>(Roll no. 240) *Senate Passage With Amendment:* 09/23/1993 : Bill Passed: 88 - 10<http://www.votesmart.org/issue_keyvote_detail.php?cs_id=7786>(Record Vote Number 287) *House Conference Report Vote:* 09/29/1993 : Conference Report Adopted 321 - 108 (Roll no. 467) *Senate Conference Report Vote:* 09/30/1993 : Conference Report Adopted: 88 - 11 <http://www.votesmart.org/issue_keyvote_detail.php?cs_id=8391> (Record Vote Number 297) *President Passage:* 09/30/1993 : Signed Became Public Law Number 103-87 Sponsor: Rep. Obey, David Ross (D-WI) (out of office) =============================== So, once again, I have established that those who claim Gingrich is a "Big Tax, Big Spending, Big Government conservative, are either, (1) Wacko Left, Socialst/Elitist Moonbats with an agenda, or (2) Wacko Right, Conspiratorialist Crackpots with an agenda. In any case, the facts reveal that Gingrich does not support and never has supported large government involvement in Americans' lives! On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 10:34 PM, Jonathan <[email protected]>wrote: > *Keith, > > It is you who needs to get his facts straight. In four instances the votes > you claim as nay or against are not even listed at the links you provided. > In another instance you provided an incorrect link. The correct link, > however, shows a yea vote. In two others you claim nay votes when in fact > yea votes were cast. > > **INLINE:* > > > On 05/13/2011 11:52 AM, Keith In Köln wrote: > > Hello Jonathan! > > I love this, "Let's Review": > > Just some examples of his big government votes: > > 03-21-1991 - $40 billion - bailout of failed savings and loan institutions; > > Voted For; And I agree with the vote, this turned out to be profitable for > the United States and its taxpayers; > > > 06-26-1991 - $52.6 billion - agriculture program subsidies, and food > stamps; > > Voted Against: > http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=26821&type=category&category=43&go.x=21&go.y=11 > > *Your link is bad - this vote not listed.* > > > > 10-05-1992 - $66.5 billion - housing and community development; > > Voted Against: > http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=26821&type=category&category=43&go.x=21&go.y=11 > > *Your link is bad - this vote not listed.* > > > > 09-22-1994 - $250.6 billion - appropriations for the Departments of Labor, > HHS, and Education. > > Voted Against: > http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=26821&type=category&category=43&go.x=21&go.y=11 > > *Voted Yes - > http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=26821&type=category&category=27&go.x=11&go.y=5 > * > > > Foreign Aid: > > 06-27-1990 - $15.7 billion for fiscal 1991; > > Nay: > http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=26821&type=category&category=32&go.x=20&go.y=14 > > *Your link is bad - this vote not listed.* > > 06-20-1991 - $12.4 billion for fiscal 1992 and $13 billion for fiscal > 1993; > > Nay: > http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=26821&type=category&category=32&go.x=20&go.y=14 > > *Your link is bad - this vote not listed.* > > 06-25-1992 - $13.8 billion for fiscal 1993; > 06-17-1993 - $13.0 billion for fiscal 1994; > > No Vote: > http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=26821&type=category&category=32&go.x=20&go.y=14 > > *Voted Yes - > http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=26821&type=category&category=32&go.x=20&go.y=14 > * > > > > 09-29-1993 - $12.9 billion, including $2.5 billion to Russia; > > Nay: > http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=26821&type=category&category=32&go.x=20&go.y=14 > > *Voted Yes - > http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=26821&type=category&category=32&go.x=20&go.y=14 > * > > > > 08-04-1994 - $13.8 billion for fiscal 1995. > > Yea: > http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=26821&type=category&category=32&go.x=20&go.y=14 > > *Well, you got one right!* > > > ========= > > Get your facts correct Jonathan, which means staying off of the Moonbat and > Crackpot sites that you and Michael seem to enjoy so much! > > > On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Jonathan <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Keith, >> >> Holding Gingrich out as a defender of small government by accepting what >> he says as opposed to what he has actually done does not seem very bright on >> your part. >> >> Gingrich had mediocre Conservative Index ratings: >> >> 96th Congress: 85 >> 97th Congress: 77 >> 98th Congress: 74 >> 99th Congress: 80 >> 100th Congress: 80 >> 101st Congress: 57 >> 100nd Congress: 60 >> 103rd Congress: 78 >> >> Just some examples of his big government votes: >> >> 03-21-1991 - $40 billion - bailout of failed savings and loan >> institutions; >> 06-26-1991 - $52.6 billion - agriculture program subsidies, and food >> stamps; >> 10-05-1992 - $66.5 billion - housing and community development; >> 09-22-1994 - $250.6 billion - appropriations for the Departments of Labor, >> HHS, and Education. >> >> Foreign Aid: >> >> 06-27-1990 - $15.7 billion for fiscal 1991; >> 06-20-1991 - $12.4 billion for fiscal 1992 and $13 billion for fiscal >> 1993; >> 06-25-1992 - $13.8 billion for fiscal 1993; >> 08-06-1992 - $12.3 billion for the IMF. >> 06-17-1993 - $13.0 billion for fiscal 1994; >> 09-29-1993 - $12.9 billion, including $2.5 billion to Russia; >> 08-04-1994 - $13.8 billion for fiscal 1995. >> >> I could likely spend most of the day finding his pro-big government votes. >> >> >> >> On 05/13/2011 01:20 AM, Keith In Köln wrote: >> >> Guten Morgen from Köln Michael! >> >> To prove my point, I will take the time to refute another one of your >> dumb, "cut and paste" posts. >> >> As usual, Michael took an article from a Moonbat, Tom Woods, who quotes >> another Moonbat, Bob Wenzel, in their bashing of Former House Speaker Newt >> Gingrich, the crux of the articles amount to nothing other than some name >> calling, specifically that Mr. Gingrich is a weasel. >> >> Let's review: >> >> First, Woods cites Wentzel's "brief" article as being somehow "sharp" >> and "insightful". Here's what Wentzel said, according to Woods, the, >> "brief, sharp insightful" article in its entirety: >> >> "*Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich will officially jump into the race >> for the Republican presidential nomination on Wednesday with announcements >> on Facebook and Twitter, * >> ** >> *The Gingrich campaign strategy appears to be that he will run not on any >> principles, but more on the fact that he is not President Obama. >> >> A Gingrich snippet:** >> * >> >> *The fact is, we are not going to close the deficit and move towards a >> balanced budget unless we follow the policies that foster the economic >> growth necessary to create jobs.The first and most immediate step would be >> to employ the policies that encourage investment, create jobs, and reward >> innovation and entrepreneurship -- exactly the opposite of the Obama >> anti-jobs policies* >> >> >> >> *Aside from the attack on President Obama, the underlying message here is >> that Gingrich wants to balance the budget not by reducing government >> spending, but by increasing tax revenues through more jobs. In other words, >> Gingrich sees no problem with the current size of government."* >> ** >> *========* >> ** >> Obviously, both Wentzel and Woods are either just total ignoramuses, >> and/or they are purposely attempting to besmirch Mr. Gingrich's long record >> and established policy of smaller federal government. For example, here is >> a speech from just two months ago, on Mr. Gingrich's policies on smaller, >> limited federal government: >> ** >> >> http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/118653/20110304/newt-gingrich-2012-presidential-aspirations-smaller-government.htm >> >> *"We need to declare our independence from trying to protect and defend >> failed bureaucracies that magically become ours as soon as we are in charge >> of them. We appoint solid conservatives to a department and within three >> weeks they are defending and protecting the very department that they would >> have been attacking before they got appointed. * >> >> *I think that there are two grave lessons for the conservative movement >> since 1980. The first, which we still haven't come to grips with, is that >> governing..."* >> Source: Speech at 2011 Conservative Political Action Conference Feb 9, >> 2008 >> The 21st Century Contract with America includes: >> >> * * >> - *Change the mindset of big government by replacing bureaucratic >> public administration with Entrepreneurial Public Management so government >> can operate with the speed, effectiveness, & efficiency of the information >> age. * >> - *Balance the federal budget and insist on a lean government, low >> tax, low interest rate economy to maximize growth. * >> - *Insist on congressional reform to make the legislative branch >> responsive to the needs of the 21st century.* >> >> * * >> Source: Gingrich Communications website, www.newt.org, “Issues” Sep 1, >> 2007 ============= >> >> I could go on and on showing and demonstrating Mr. Gingrich's belief that >> our federal government is out of control, and that both Woods and Wentzel >> are Moonbats. As a matter of fact, why don't you Google both men and see >> what their credentials are? You will find that they are not qualified any >> more than you or I, to be espousing their misinformation. >> >> So, the point being, is that the next time you cut and paste an article >> that you expect some kind of thoughtful feedback on, maybe you should start >> trying to post a little more thoughtful cut and paste articles? >> >> >> >> ** >> -- >> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >> >> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ >> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >> * Read the latest breaking news, and more. >> Watch host Steve Samblis every Friday as he brings you the top three >> newly >> released movies of the week. >> >> http://click.lavabit.com/es317zgkwbdtcdhd83676dnqtnqnqdrh9rezkdn8sz1ri83n9hry/ >> >> >> -- >> Freedom is always illegal! When we ask for freedom, we have already >> failed. It is only when we declare freedom for ourselves and refuse to >> accept any less, that we have any possibility of being free. >> >> "Why should we bother with 'realities' when we have the psychological >> refuge of unthinking patriotism?" >> Gary Leupp - Professor of History, Tufts University >> -- >> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >> >> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ >> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >> * Read the latest breaking news, and more. >> > > -- > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > Find: Web Services. Review & Compare! > > http://click.lavabit.com/ccoof4qaak15r1w1r5igya3rthn4fhxxb3h1n1wq5ch6br7qawxy/ > > > -- > Freedom is always illegal! When we ask for freedom, we have already > failed. It is only when we declare freedom for ourselves and refuse to > accept any less, that we have any possibility of being free. > > "Why should we bother with 'realities' when we have the psychological > refuge of unthinking patriotism?" > Gary Leupp - Professor of History, Tufts University > > -- > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
