Much Ado About Nothing

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Counter-intuitive proposition of the day: Anyone who considers himself a “deficit hawk” or “fiscal conservative” and gets worked up over earmarks is either clueless or disingenuous.

We’re hearing a lot lately about earmarks – DC-speak for pork-barrel spending. Whether it’s the “stimulus” bill signed into law last month, or the $410 billion spending bill that’s supposed to tide over Uncle Sam for the rest of fiscal ’09, it seems we can’t get away from them.

Earmarks: Much Ado About Nothing by Dave Gonigam

 

[Zoomie1980]

Counter-intuitive proposition of the day: Anyone who considers himself a “deficit hawk” or “fiscal conservative” and gets worked up over earmarks is either clueless or disingenuous.

We’re hearing a lot lately about earmarks – DC-speak for pork-barrel spending. Whether it’s the “stimulus” bill signed into law last month, or the $410 billion spending bill that’s supposed to tide over Uncle Sam for the rest of fiscal ’09, it seems we can’t get away from them.

Earmarks: Much Ado About Nothing by Dave Gonigam

Very good point. I've also heard the argument that if not for Earmarks, the small states would get virtually NOTHING in way of discretionary spending. Earmarks occur AFTER the total is agreed on. Earmarks allow for states like Wyoming and Rhode Island to at least get something instead of the New York and California whores to get it all.

 

[wimpy77]

very nice article kevin. thanks for posting

 

[auditor0007]

Hopefully, most people understood this before reading your post. I have a real earmark for everyone. How about the entire Department of Education? That's not an earmark, I know. Just an entire department we could do without.

 

[Paulie]

This is why even Ron Paul has earmarks. They're not entirely evil.

The debate over them is just to distract from the fact that there's still trillions of dollars being flushed down the toilet.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

[youtube]xoD5Yk1imBk[/youtube]

Ron Paul on Neil Cavuto's show discussing earmarks.

 

[Ravi]

Jebus...isn't McCain the one that's always had a bug up his butt about earmarks? Didn't the Republican leadership just last week suggest shutting down the federal goverment over earmarks...even though roughly half of them are their's?

It is nothing but political posturing. Any elected offical that can't bring home a piece of the pie doesn't deserve to be reelected.

 

[jillian]

Jebus...isn't McCain the one that's always had a bug up his butt about earmarks? Didn't the Republican leadership just last week suggest shutting down the federal goverment over earmarks...even though roughly half of them are their's?

It is nothing but political posturing. Any elected offical that can't bring home a piece of the pie doesn't deserve to be reelected.

not to mention the fact that you're supposed to bring money to your district. There's a difference between waste (which I think most of us object to) and legitimate spending.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Jebus...isn't McCain the one that's always had a bug up his butt about earmarks? Didn't the Republican leadership just last week suggest shutting down the federal goverment over earmarks...even though roughly half of them are their's?

It is nothing but political posturing. Any elected offical that can't bring home a piece of the pie doesn't deserve to be reelected.

If you read the article or watch the video McCain's stance on earmarks are discussed, though mostly in passing. The consensus seems to be that McCain clearly has no idea what he's talking about, or that he's simply posturing.

 

[johnrocks]

I look at it like this, I oppose the vast majority of what goes on in DC but damnit, if it's going to happen then I want my Congressman inserting projects in bills instead of some bureaucrat or the Executive Branch deciding where it is going to be spent. If it does not increase the money by one cent, that is how it should be, this is a bunch of grandstanding by McCain and a few others imho.

 

[xsited1]

Nice.

So why is there so much screeching about earmarks? Well, it serves a very useful purpose for our political masters: If you get the public in a lather over golf courses and dog parks, they’re less likely to ask questions about bailing out failed bankers, or mega-deals for defense contractors, or even wider questions about the proper role and size of government.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

[youtube]fq_5H1XKVww[/youtube]

 

[Paulie]

Jebus...isn't McCain the one that's always had a bug up his butt about earmarks? Didn't the Republican leadership just last week suggest shutting down the federal goverment over earmarks...even though roughly half of them are their's?

It is nothing but political posturing. Any elected offical that can't bring home a piece of the pie doesn't deserve to be reelected.

If you read the article or watch the video McCain's stance on earmarks are discussed, though mostly in passing. The consensus seems to be that McCain clearly has no idea what he's talking about, or that he's simply posturing.

Ravi only reads her own articles. The rest get automatic negative responses from her. It's how she's programmed