Read the commenting rules carefully because they will be enforced!
This is NOT the government's money, it's TAXPAYER MONEY.
Money that was taken from US in the form of taxes.
And the Democrats are talking about how they need to raise taxes? For what, more bullshit like this?
La Raza? Does no one else undestand that La Raza literally translates as "The Race?"
Unbelievable what they want to do with OUR MONEY.
ISN'T IT?
Oink, oink
How about funding a program that will teach our elected official how to get their heads out of their butts. That goes for the people who keep voting this pigs into office as well.
I'm upset that this Congress, which was supposed to be not only the most ethical but the most progressive in history, hasn't sent even one stinkin' appropriations bill to the president yet. What does that mean? Not much to most people but I work as a federal contractor on Fort Leavenworth. I am the Catholic Parish Coordinator, which means I have to process a LOT of purchase orders for functions that promote family and religious life, events and such that facilitate the morale of military families.
Well, we don't have any appropriated funds so we just have to suck it up. We're robbing Peter to pay Paul and the prevaling concensus is that the Congress is LAME and ineffective. There is NO EXCUSE for them to be passiong pork legislation while army families don't even have what they need to function.
No, there isn't Amy. No excuse at all.
Good one Bob!
The Democrats campaigned and campaign about "taking America back." What we NEED to do is take America back from the POLITICIANS, fire each and every one of them that has fallen sway to the beltway mindset and put some REAL PEOPLE back in office. It's time to stop career politics.
Honest politicians? Um...what are we gonna have a total of like 5 people on the hill?
(duck)
We'd be lucky to have THAT many left...
These coming from a bunch of right-o-cons who allowed this president to waste trilliaons in a war.
I would say you people need to get your heads out of your asses, but I figure they probably belong there.
Pleeeeeeease...bunch of whinners.
All that "wasted" money has kept your ass safe from attacks and free to make smarmy comments, hasn't it, "mighty?"
Mighty, in case you didn't notice..the president VETOED the bill...it is the DEMS that are whining about it, which you would have seen had you bothered to click the links before proving without a doubt that you don't bother to research before commenting.
READ THE RULES---BANNED--Spree
Edited By Siteowner
And yet, not all pork is created equal. Some very important projects (certainly not most of those on your list) might never get done were it not for earmarks. I'd be interested in your point of view about the DHS and DoD budgets (when sent to the President) re: Congressional earmarks.
Seems like we've done this before, but then again...
There is a difference between pork for jazz at Lincoln Center, Guam Community College, a jazz museum, and such as that, and national security. That dog won't hunt.
Yes, there is waste in defense spending that can be trimmed out, but it's not the same as this other business listed in spree's posting.
Just peeking while changing into something warm.
http://www.cagw.org/site/News2?p...rticle&
id=11100
There is some of the pork added in H.R. 3222, the Fiscal 2008 Department of Defense Appropriations Act.
I think anyone with a 1/2 a brain can determine what is pork related and what is defense related.
If not, then I don 't have the time to explain the obvious.
Night again all.
Spree, I am confused. At the beginning of the post you say more than 2,000 earmarks total $22 billion and then later you cite the Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) who say they found 2,274 projects worth only $1.7 billion...am I comparing two different numbers or just not understanding something. Sounds to me as though at the beginning you say it added $22 billion to the bill and then cite a source the only says $1.7 billion. Just looking for some clarification.
Also, did anyone read close enough to see that the "pork" spending actually is DOWN 35 percent from 2005, the last time a Labor/HHS bill included earmarks?!?!
Their original report as it said in the post was a "preliminary analysis" that they produced a week before.
Other things were "air dropped" in.
They will have a final report out and I will bring that to everyone when it it is issued.
Thank you! I had a news flash from the American Diabetes Assocation about not letting GW veto this bill, but even diabetics can read the pork when they see it. I'm glad he vetoed it --
LMAO Jo!!! I do not have a problem with the legitimate spending in the bill, that is deserving and the politicians from both sides of the aisle that continue to make the legitimate programs wait because they stuff pork into the bill, are the ones that need to learn to know better.
If this "pork" is so worthy, let it be on a stand alone bill and see if it is worthy enough to be passed instead of planting it in needed bills to force their earmarks through.
I didn't like it when the Reps in control and I don't like it now that the Dems are in control.
Commenting by HaloScan
