Comments on: Enough With The Earmark Fixation http://www.amconmag.com/larison/2009/03/12/enough-with-the-earmark-fixation/ n. the principle of good order<br /><br /> "Observe the strange inversion of all order and sense! Dignity debased; how vilely is the function of a consul prostituted!" ~The Craftsman Sat, 21 Nov 2009 23:02:13 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.3 hourly 1 By: jkratz http://www.amconmag.com/larison/2009/03/12/enough-with-the-earmark-fixation/comment-page-1/#comment-30786 jkratz Fri, 13 Mar 2009 22:09:02 +0000 http://www.amconmag.com/larison/?p=8798#comment-30786 The thing that bothers me about the anti-earmark crusades is the fact that when these clowns come out to the media to take up the great cause they give the smallest hint possible as to what the earmark is for. This happens every time McCain gets out there on his high horse. He loves to scowl and sigh while reciting short snippets of the earmark description. I'm sure many of them are wasteful spending. I'm also sure that many of them, as you point out, are not. There was an article on Yahoo News several days ago about the latest Omnibus spending bill and the earmarks it contained. The authors of the article thought it relevant to mention those earmarks in the bill that were put in place by members of Obama's administration...when they were still Senators. I'm still not sure of the relevance of those facts but I digress. One of the examples mentioned in the article was about $200,000 to help build a children's museum in Joe Biden's home state of Delaware. God forbid tax money should be used to help educate children! And even worse it was the Vice President when he was a Senator! I really wish the news media weren't so driven by short attention spans and short segments where only snippets of information, that can not possibly explain a situation thoroughly enough, are provided to the general public. It does nothing for our national discourse. It reminds me of the complaints by the talking heads on the various "news" networks that Obama would give answers that were too long during the debates. Yeah...it truly is a shame when a presidential candidate tries to explain something with some depth to the answer. The thing that bothers me about the anti-earmark crusades is the fact that when these clowns come out to the media to take up the great cause they give the smallest hint possible as to what the earmark is for. This happens every time McCain gets out there on his high horse. He loves to scowl and sigh while reciting short snippets of the earmark description. I’m sure many of them are wasteful spending. I’m also sure that many of them, as you point out, are not.

There was an article on Yahoo News several days ago about the latest Omnibus spending bill and the earmarks it contained. The authors of the article thought it relevant to mention those earmarks in the bill that were put in place by members of Obama’s administration…when they were still Senators. I’m still not sure of the relevance of those facts but I digress. One of the examples mentioned in the article was about $200,000 to help build a children’s museum in Joe Biden’s home state of Delaware. God forbid tax money should be used to help educate children! And even worse it was the Vice President when he was a Senator!

I really wish the news media weren’t so driven by short attention spans and short segments where only snippets of information, that can not possibly explain a situation thoroughly enough, are provided to the general public. It does nothing for our national discourse. It reminds me of the complaints by the talking heads on the various “news” networks that Obama would give answers that were too long during the debates. Yeah…it truly is a shame when a presidential candidate tries to explain something with some depth to the answer.

]]> By: ottovbvs http://www.amconmag.com/larison/2009/03/12/enough-with-the-earmark-fixation/comment-page-1/#comment-30778 ottovbvs Fri, 13 Mar 2009 19:21:51 +0000 http://www.amconmag.com/larison/?p=8798#comment-30778 Daniel, why are you so sensible. The earmark obsession which the press seem content to echo is totally irrelevant, makes the GOP look totally hypocritical, and as you point out could actually be harmful to some sitting GOP members. The earmarks in this bill depending on whose counting you were going with were somewhere between 1% and 3% of the total...so lets settle for splitting the difference at around $6billion. No doubt there are some iffy ones in there but is it really a leap of the imagination to recognize the in Iowa where they have more hogs than people, that pig poop might be a bit of a problem. Then we have legions of Republican senators/representatives complaining about the bill as it is revealed they personally have millions of dollars of earmarks in the bill. If earmarks are largely shut down in the next budget the big losers will be the Republicans who are not going to be able to point to anything they brought home from congress. But as ever the GOP these days can't see beyond its nose. Daniel, why are you so sensible. The earmark obsession which the press seem content to echo is totally irrelevant, makes the GOP look totally hypocritical, and as you point out could actually be harmful to some sitting GOP members. The earmarks in this bill depending on whose counting you were going with were somewhere between 1% and 3% of the total…so lets settle for splitting the difference at around $6billion. No doubt there are some iffy ones in there but is it really a leap of the imagination to recognize the in Iowa where they have more hogs than people, that pig poop might be a bit of a problem. Then we have legions of Republican senators/representatives complaining about the bill as it is revealed they personally have millions of dollars of earmarks in the bill. If earmarks are largely shut down in the next budget the big losers will be the Republicans who are not going to be able to point to anything they brought home from congress. But as ever the GOP these days can’t see beyond its nose.

]]>