Originally posted by: palehorse
Obama has already signed off on more spending, during his very first month as President, than the total spending on the entire Iraq War.
That's some scary shit...
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
$7.7 Billion In Earmarks In 2009 Omnibus Spending Bill
I guess there was more pork than the original half-assed article stated... go figure...
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
$7.7 Billion In Earmarks In 2009 Omnibus Spending Bill
I guess there was more pork than the original half-assed article stated... go figure...
8,570 <<disclosed earmarks Hmm... I wonder how many hidden earmarks are in there?
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: Possessed Freak
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
The difference is McCain's real, the other three aren't.Originally posted by: Possessed Freak
Superman was polled yesterday at the Justice League Headquarters. He said he would propose more bailouts.Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Do you believe Bush or if elected McCain wouldn't be spending this kind of money now?Originally posted by: blackangst1
Yeah saw this this morning. GWB's massive spending is quickly falling out of sight and being eclipsed. 2-4 years from now we will WISH for his spending.
Emperor Palpatine recommended we shoot it with lasers instead of bailing out.
Jesus Christ did not return our phone calls.
Oh, sorry, I thought we were talking about hypothetical situations... "What Would McCain Do?" sort of thing.
There are many differences comparing McCain to Obama and yet you hint that they would both have the same solution. Has McCain been officially polled? Until that happens, it remains an act of faith and belief that McCain would promote bailouts or not.
McCain voted against the porkulus so isn't that "officially polled"?
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
$7.7 Billion In Earmarks In 2009 Omnibus Spending Bill
I guess there was more pork than the original half-assed article stated... go figure...
8,570 <<<<disclosed earmarks Hmm... I wonder how many hidden earmarks are in there?
So you started out talking about the $410B spending bill, but are now referring to the $787B stimulus bill? Talk about moving the goalposts. Geeze, Cad, I mean come on.
So we're all on the same page, there's less than 1% pork in the spending bill and less than 1% pork in the stimulus bill. Do the math: $7.7B in earmarks, divided by $787B in the stimulus package = .97%.
And your own linked article mentioned that overall earmarks have gone DOWN from FY2008 to FY2009. Not by much, but still I'll take a downward trend as a good sign.
Originally posted by: soulcougher73
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: Possessed Freak
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
The difference is McCain's real, the other three aren't.Originally posted by: Possessed Freak
Superman was polled yesterday at the Justice League Headquarters. He said he would propose more bailouts.Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Do you believe Bush or if elected McCain wouldn't be spending this kind of money now?Originally posted by: blackangst1
Yeah saw this this morning. GWB's massive spending is quickly falling out of sight and being eclipsed. 2-4 years from now we will WISH for his spending.
Emperor Palpatine recommended we shoot it with lasers instead of bailing out.
Jesus Christ did not return our phone calls.
Oh, sorry, I thought we were talking about hypothetical situations... "What Would McCain Do?" sort of thing.
There are many differences comparing McCain to Obama and yet you hint that they would both have the same solution. Has McCain been officially polled? Until that happens, it remains an act of faith and belief that McCain would promote bailouts or not.
McCain voted against the porkulus so isn't that "officially polled"?
Of course he did. And if the Repubs were in office he would vote for it. Open your eyes mate.
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: soulcougher73
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: Possessed Freak
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
The difference is McCain's real, the other three aren't.Originally posted by: Possessed Freak
Superman was polled yesterday at the Justice League Headquarters. He said he would propose more bailouts.Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Do you believe Bush or if elected McCain wouldn't be spending this kind of money now?Originally posted by: blackangst1
Yeah saw this this morning. GWB's massive spending is quickly falling out of sight and being eclipsed. 2-4 years from now we will WISH for his spending.
Emperor Palpatine recommended we shoot it with lasers instead of bailing out.
Jesus Christ did not return our phone calls.
Oh, sorry, I thought we were talking about hypothetical situations... "What Would McCain Do?" sort of thing.
There are many differences comparing McCain to Obama and yet you hint that they would both have the same solution. Has McCain been officially polled? Until that happens, it remains an act of faith and belief that McCain would promote bailouts or not.
McCain voted against the porkulus so isn't that "officially polled"?
Of course he did. And if the Repubs were in office he would vote for it. Open your eyes mate.
:roll: You know this how?
I wasn't the one claiming to know if he would or wouldn't - I simply responded to the notion that McCain hadn't been "polled". He very much was polled - he cast his vote against it.
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
The difference is McCain's real, the other three aren't.Originally posted by: Possessed Freak
Superman was polled yesterday at the Justice League Headquarters. He said he would propose more bailouts.Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Do you believe Bush or if elected McCain wouldn't be spending this kind of money now?Originally posted by: blackangst1
Yeah saw this this morning. GWB's massive spending is quickly falling out of sight and being eclipsed. 2-4 years from now we will WISH for his spending.
Emperor Palpatine recommended we shoot it with lasers instead of bailing out.
Jesus Christ did not return our phone calls.
Oh, sorry, I thought we were talking about hypothetical situations... "What Would McCain Do?" sort of thing.
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
$7.7 Billion In Earmarks In 2009 Omnibus Spending Bill
I guess there was more pork than the original half-assed article stated... go figure...
8,570 <<<disclosed earmarks Hmm... I wonder how many hidden earmarks are in there?
So you started out talking about the $410B spending bill, but are now referring to the $787B stimulus bill? Talk about moving the goalposts. Geeze, Cad, I mean come on.
So we're all on the same page, there's less than 1% pork in the spending bill and less than 1% pork in the stimulus bill. Do the math: $7.7B in earmarks, divided by $787B in the stimulus package = .97%.
And your own linked article mentioned that overall earmarks have gone DOWN from FY2008 to FY2009. Not by much, but still I'll take a downward trend as a good sign.
Originally posted by: heyheybooboo
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
$7.7 Billion In Earmarks In 2009 Omnibus Spending Bill
I guess there was more pork than the original half-assed article stated... go figure...
8,570 <<<<disclosed earmarks Hmm... I wonder how many hidden earmarks are in there?
So you started out talking about the $410B spending bill, but are now referring to the $787B stimulus bill? Talk about moving the goalposts. Geeze, Cad, I mean come on.
So we're all on the same page, there's less than 1% pork in the spending bill and less than 1% pork in the stimulus bill. Do the math: $7.7B in earmarks, divided by $787B in the stimulus package = .97%.
And your own linked article mentioned that overall earmarks have gone DOWN from FY2008 to FY2009. Not by much, but still I'll take a downward trend as a good sign.
**snicker @ CAD**
FY 2005 earmarks exceeded 13,000 in number for total funding in excess of $28 billion.
So he is whining about a near 75% reduction and promoting a secret conspiracy despite new disclosure requirements as described here.
He also thinks Bobby did one heckuva job last night
Originally posted by: palehorse
Quick questions for those who are defending the earmarks: Has their total somehow dropped below some magic threshold of "acceptable amount"? Why are there still any earmarks in any legislation!?
IMO, we should no longer allow lawmakers to inject any earmarks into the legislative process. none. nada. zip. zero. nil. We should keep bitching loudly -- and voting accordingly -- until the entire practice of earmarks has been eradicated.
The only "acceptable" total is zero. Period.