More scrutiny of pork-barrel projects

[DiveCon]

I think most of the republicans are waiting to hear what the new definition of "earmark" is.

Rush will be there for them, I am sure.

He's explain to them how an earmark that a Republican who insisted that it go into the bill, but who is voting no for the package isn't an an earmark because, even though the fellow knew perfectly well the bill would pass, and he'd get his earmark, his no vote gave him the higher moral ground.

And the dittoheads will accept that convoluted dislogic because ...well, because they're dittoheads, naturally.

Like I said the majority will not pay attention to the details, they applaud those who voted nay, not realizing many of them had written in there very own earmarks in the bill, all while voting no supposedly on the grounds of fighting earmarks.

and you would be WRONG, as usual
i was against this porkulous bill just as much as i wasa against the previous 3 porkulous bills
some call them TARP some call them bailouts, i call them all unconstitutional

 

[Gunny]

Does anyone find it amusing that a number of the democrats and republicans who opposed the spending bill on the grounds of earmarks, actually had their own earmarks included? So they got the money for their pet projects and got to look like a wasteful spending fighter at the same time.. But the simple minded will never pay attention to the details, just keep looking at the yea and nay..

This isn't a partisan issue, much as the partisan bleeters would have us believe. This is an out of control bureaucracy issue with both sides of the political aisle equally guilty.

This was Obama's chance to step up to the plate and make a stand. He deferred until next year. It's ALWAYS "next year" with these politicians.

They all stink the same stink.

 

[bk1983]

Rush will be there for them, I am sure.

He's explain to them how an earmark that a Republican who insisted that it go into the bill, but who is voting no for the package isn't an an earmark because, even though the fellow knew perfectly well the bill would pass, and he'd get his earmark, his no vote gave him the higher moral ground.

And the dittoheads will accept that convoluted dislogic because ...well, because they're dittoheads, naturally.

Like I said the majority will not pay attention to the details, they applaud those who voted nay, not realizing many of them had written in there very own earmarks in the bill, all while voting no supposedly on the grounds of fighting earmarks.

and you would be WRONG, as usual
i was against this porkulous bill just as much as i wasa against the previous 3 porkulous bills
some call them TARP some call them bailouts, i call them all unconstitutional

So are you telling me the majority of voters know that even though the republicans were on tv ranting and raving about the big bad earmark, that they were responsible for a large portion of earmarks? Republicans make up 40% of the earmarks, they also make up 40% of congress,while Democrats make up 60% of congress and 60% of earmarks. tell me again the difference between the two parties? Tell me again which party fights wasteful spending and expansion of government? Not who talks about it when they make there rounds on the news circuit, who actually delivers?

Since you claim to be against all wasteful spending, how did you feel when Bush signed his 550B omnibus spending bill with over 10,000 earmarks, were those okay? Or does it only matter when a Democrat signs a pork laden bill? Do the republicans write earmarks in with a magical pen and the democrats uses a dull sharpie? Come on, what is the reason? Face it you are a die hard REPUBLICAN! The party can go against everything you believe, and you will continue to back them. I am sorry, but if you still buy the belief of Republicans are against wasteful spending, then there is no help for you. You may trot around with the title of a conservative, but you seem more like a republican hidden in conservative clothing.

 

[bk1983]

Does anyone find it amusing that a number of the democrats and republicans who opposed the spending bill on the grounds of earmarks, actually had their own earmarks included? So they got the money for their pet projects and got to look like a wasteful spending fighter at the same time.. But the simple minded will never pay attention to the details, just keep looking at the yea and nay..

This isn't a partisan issue, much as the partisan bleeters would have us believe. This is an out of control bureaucracy issue with both sides of the political aisle equally guilty.

This was Obama's chance to step up to the plate and make a stand. He deferred until next year. It's ALWAYS "next year" with these politicians.

They all stink the same stink.

You hit the nail on the head, the spinmasters continue to be extremely effective. You notice how a debate about wasteful spending turns into a democrat vs republican one? Besides the D and the R, I have a hard time telling them apart.

The system is broken, both parties had there share of power, none reduced the size of gov't. When everyone starts to pay more attention to the process rather then the parties, we might get somewhere. Until then, I wouldn't count on it.

 

[editec]

Of course earmarking is neither good nor bad.

But making the earmarking process subject to the same debating process as all other spending is the way to insure that it isn't a spending system that is easily abused.

Thus far, what I have hear Obama say about how he wants to change that process is a good idea.

A good idea, which I cannot help but note did NOT HAPPEN in this massive spending bill.

 

[DiveCon]

Like I said the majority will not pay attention to the details, they applaud those who voted nay, not realizing many of them had written in there very own earmarks in the bill, all while voting no supposedly on the grounds of fighting earmarks.

and you would be WRONG, as usual
i was against this porkulous bill just as much as i wasa against the previous 3 porkulous bills
some call them TARP some call them bailouts, i call them all unconstitutional

So are you telling me the majority of voters know that even though the republicans were on tv ranting and raving about the big bad earmark, that they were responsible for a large portion of earmarks? Republicans make up 40% of the earmarks, they also make up 40% of congress,while Democrats make up 60% of congress and 60% of earmarks. tell me again the difference between the two parties? Tell me again which party fights wasteful spending and expansion of government? Not who talks about it when they make there rounds on the news circuit, who actually delivers?

Since you claim to be against all wasteful spending, how did you feel when Bush signed his 550B omnibus spending bill with over 10,000 earmarks, were those okay? Or does it only matter when a Democrat signs a pork laden bill? Do the republicans write earmarks in with a magical pen and the democrats uses a dull sharpie? Come on, what is the reason? Face it you are a die hard REPUBLICAN! The party can go against everything you believe, and you will continue to back them. I am sorry, but if you still buy the belief of Republicans are against wasteful spending, then there is no help for you. You may trot around with the title of a conservative, but you seem more like a republican hidden in conservative clothing.

i HATED IT
and let them know
and i've been pissed off about a lot of the republicans doing the same damn thing
its almost expected of democrats, but i hold the republicans to a higher standard because they CLAIM to be for smaller government and lower spending

 

[DiveCon]

Of course earmarking is neither good nor bad.

But making the earmarking process subject to the same debating process as all other spending is the way to insure that it isn't a spending system that is easily abused.

Thus far, what I have hear Obama say about how he wants to change that process is a good idea.

A good idea, which I cannot help but note did NOT HAPPEN in this massive spending bill.

my problem with earmarking is that they expect the executive to give them a budget to do the work they are required to do and hope they can ask for enough to not only cover the costs of doing things that have already been mandated, plus they want to spend that money on their special pet projects
if those projects are worthy of federal funding, they should put them in their own bill to be voted on its own merit
not tie them into a totally unrelated bill