Bush Blasts Congressional ‘Majority’ For Earmarks Belonging To Leading Republicans
Bush Blasts Congressional ‘Majority’ For Earmarks Belonging To Leading Republicans
Yesterday, after President Bush used his sixth-ever veto to squash “a measure to fund education, job training and health programs,” he criticized the fiscal responsibility and spending priorities of “the majority” in Congress:
The majority was elected on a pledge of fiscal responsibility, but so far it’s acting like a teenager with a new credit card.
White House press secretary Dana Perino added that it was “not only the extra spending” that raised White House objections, but “also 2,000 earmarks that the president would like to see stripped out.”
While Bush is trying to cast the majority in Congress as “acting like drunken sailors with federal tax dollars” because of earmarks, he should take notice of who placed the largest earmarks in the bill he just vetoed: Republicans.
According to the November 6 edition of CQ Today, the two largest individual earmarks in the bill were placed by Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY):
However, much of the “pork” Boehner complained about was requested by Republicans. Aside from the “National Programs and Activities,” the single biggest earmark in the Labor-HHS-Education section of the bill belongs to Sen. Richard C. Shelby, R-Ala., who won $9.3 million for the University of Alabama in Tuscaloosa. The second-largest was requested by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. — $8.4 million for the University of Louisville Research Foundation.
If Bush were serious about spending, he’d take on McConnell and Shelby, but he hasn’t. Instead, he’s playing “pure politics” in an effort to obscure his long record of fiscal irresponsibility.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
47 Responses to “Bush Blasts Congressional ‘Majority’ For Earmarks Belonging To Leading Republicans”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
How the heyull is it that spending American tax money on AMERICANS is wasteful and irresponsible - but spending TRILLIONS on Bush’s War and putting our money in his cronies’ pockets is sound fiscal policy…??
I suppose that if I were a Republican, I’d understand how that works. As it is, it just plain disgusts me.
November 14th, 2007 at 5:04 pmWell, fact of the matter is the the majority allowed the earmarks to pass. Bush’s criticism is quite warranted. Doesn’t the majority have the job of oversight over its legislation?
November 14th, 2007 at 5:04 pmAnd he ignores that failed strategy of Rove’s: cut taxes for the wealthy and spend like mad to maintain a permanent Republican majority.
How’d that work out for you, Bush?
November 14th, 2007 at 5:06 pmOkay, I must be getting punchy, but, this actually hit my funny bone. Bush is too freaking much! He learned his lessons well from Rove.
And those republicans got the money for *gasp* universities?! But I thought universities were dangerous! Too much.
November 14th, 2007 at 5:10 pmThe Dems craft a bill with 2,000 earmarks and you find 2 earmarks you dislike. NICE!
November 14th, 2007 at 5:15 pmThe only place Bush makes sense is in his own fantasies and the twisted “intellects” of his sycophants. Statements which defy logic, and reverse reality, are hardly even newsworthy. One can predict, with perfect accuracy, their response to any piece of news. Just assume that they will project the opposite of “truth”.
November 14th, 2007 at 5:16 pmNEVER AGAIN SHOULD ANY REPUGLICAN EVER TALK ABOUT BEING FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE
THAT IS A REAGAN LIE THAT HAS BEEN PERPETUATED SINCE THE 80′S. MEANWHILE THE REPUGLICANS HAVE SOLD AMERICA TO THE HIGHEST BIDDER.
WAKE THE F UP!!!!!
November 14th, 2007 at 5:19 pmYou’re absolutely right pete.
Whatever the opposite is of whatever Bush and his “sycophants” say is most likely the truth of the matter.
As Jon Stewart so succinctly put it, “How stupid do they think we are?!”
November 14th, 2007 at 5:19 pmThis is Bush the uniter in action. Don’t have a word with your staunch supporters who advocated this legislation - instead put the news byte out there blaming Democrats.
November 14th, 2007 at 5:21 pmDon’t accept responsibility for your own fiscal irresponsibility (how many trillions is that in Iraq?) but instead blame the congress.
Don’t acknowledge that you are a hypocrite when you can’t “afford” SCHIP, but you can demand all you want for Pentagon (non-war) spending.
Bush is a student of Rove - and one thing that the duncehead was able to learn is how to fine tune his mean streak and use it in politics.
Bush has always been a mean person - I was going to list his many offenses, but the list is too long - this is just another example of the unscrupulous, incorrigible Bush.
rastaman is right too. The next time anybody says anything about conservatives being fiscally wise we should just laugh. Loudly.
November 14th, 2007 at 5:22 pmBush (along with other Repub leaders) is programmed to blame only Democrats, regardless of the problem or who is truly contributing to it. This was most evident at the 2004 RNC, when Democrats were blamed for all ills in our government, despite the Republicans controlling the White House, both houses of Congress, the Supreme Court, and even most of the governorships in the country.
When I hear Bush blasting Democrats for anything, I just hear a faint buzzing sound, signifying nothing.
November 14th, 2007 at 5:23 pm“How stupid do they think we are?!â€
November 14th, 2007 at 5:26 pmVery.
How stupid are we?
That remains to be seen.
The whole system of earmarking needs to be looked at, and it doesn’t matter which party is the greater offender.
Earmarks have been made for some worthy things, and they have been made for boondoggles such as golf for kids. It’s obvious that an earmark is a GRANT, and we should look upon them as such.
Do we really want our Congresspeople deciding who gets grants, and for what, and for how much? I don’t know about any of you, but I would rather that government grants be issued by an entity that’s non-partisan and not influenced by lobbyists and other favor-seekers. The system we have now is way too vulnerable to corruption (think Ted Stevens and others).
November 14th, 2007 at 5:28 pmAnd he ignores that failed strategy of Rove’s: cut taxes for the wealthy and spend like mad to maintain a permanent Republican majority.
How’d that work out for you, Bush?
Comment by Frosty Cupcake — November 14, 2007 @ 5:06 pm
——————-
TWENTY THOUSAND DOLLARS PER FAMILY in the US and countless dead and wounded to fight the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. How much would it take to capture Bin Laden? Is this Hillary’s realm?
November 14th, 2007 at 5:28 pmActing like a teenager with a new credit card? You mean, Bush, the way you’ve acted with your Iraq war of choice? The hypocrisy is astounding. Congress is trying to help people. Bush is trying (and succeeding) to kill people. Which is better?
November 14th, 2007 at 5:28 pmHow stupid are we?
That remains to be seen.
Comment by Art — November 14, 2007 @ 5:26 pm
We were stupid enough to elect Bush twice and many Americans are quite stupid enough to join the pres in blaming the Democrats for every problem this country has.
November 14th, 2007 at 5:34 pmI think the stupid Americans outnumber the non-stupid ones. The trick is getting the stupid ones to vote in a non-stupid manner.
Instead, he’s playing “pure politics†in an effort to obscure
his long record of fiscal irresponsibility.
… his and THEIRS - the 109th congress…
November 14th, 2007 at 5:35 pmthe dems had better be pushin’ that hard…
since january, the repugs have been quick to place blame on “congress”,
and the uninformed sheeple just nod and bleep…
…
Bush Blasts Congressional ‘Majority’
November 14th, 2007 at 5:36 pmWhat’s the matter bushy, is Congress putting the breaks on our country completely crumbling, folding, and the complete death of our social programs? Your mission not accomplished?????
The Dems craft a bill with 2,000 earmarks and you find 2 earmarks you dislike. NICE!
Comment by Roger_Roger — November 14, 2007 @ 5:15 pm
This idiot is as bad as Bush. Sounds like an echo chamber.
WHICH of the 2,000 were put in there by Dems, numbn*ts? Which were put in by GOOPers?
Both parties worked on this one and 50 GOOPers supported it.
A little HONESTY, please!!!!
November 14th, 2007 at 5:36 pmThe trick is getting the stupid ones to vote in a non-stupid manner.
Comment by dim wit — November 14, 2007 @ 5:34 pm
Could we set up fake election booths, like the tunnels painted onto rocks in Road Runner cartoons? Mebbe they’d spend the whole day trying to get INTO the booth, and never figure it out.
It’s worth a try, no?
November 14th, 2007 at 5:39 pmWait a minute - Bush said the “majority in Congress”, and he’s right - if “the majority in congress” hadn’t passed that spendig bill, it wouldn’t have been in front of him, to veto. After awhile we need to stop parsing everything he says to mean only Democrats, after all anyone with whom he disagrees wiill receive his or her fair share of disparagement.
November 14th, 2007 at 5:42 pmOoops! A bell rang!
Blame the Democrats/Clinton!!
Got Pavlov…?
November 14th, 2007 at 5:44 pmMitch: Your man is looking you straight in the eye. He knows who you are. Give it up! Come out of the closet! It’s not going to hurt you!
November 14th, 2007 at 5:45 pmNote to Dem’s - Get rid of earmarks! It is obviously easy to pay off supporters back home in this manner, but no other level of government could get away slipping designed cash into legislation which has an entirely different purpose. Congress, over the years has made a really nice club for themselves. Its time for a change of the status quo.
Senators and representatives SHOULD be required to make their case for giving $MIllions of taxpayer dollars away in public. If it’s justified, it will stand the light of day. How many times has it been discovered that earmarks are designated as political payback rather than a practical allocation of dollars to deal with a significant problem?
November 14th, 2007 at 5:45 pmActing like a teenager with a new credit card? You mean, Bush, the way you’ve acted with your Iraq war of choice?
Comment by Tender Chicken — November 14, 2007 @ 5:28 pm
I mourn every soul lost to the reckless, evil, neocons; and the chimp gets several extra helpings of blame. However, I find it even more disturbing (considering economics only) that the cost of the wars is a small portion of their spending spree.
They have been passing out signed checks like candy. In fairness, the Dems haven’t exactly helped. “Fiscal responsibility” isn’t going to arrive any time soon. More than likely it will take a financial collapse of “Great Depression” proportions to initiate any real change.
What is truly frightening is the fact that China, Russia, India etc. aren’t likely to suffer with us. The destruction of our credibility, and newfound status as a “Rogue Nation” makes it unlikely ANYONE will be willing to help.
November 14th, 2007 at 5:47 pmAnd Bush is like a baby chymp with an elephant gun.
November 14th, 2007 at 5:48 pmThe Dems craft a bill with 2,000 earmarks and you find 2 earmarks you dislike. NICE!
Comment by Roger_Roger
What makes you think that there are only 2 Republican earmarks out of the 2,000 loon Roger? The article said that these were the two largest earmarks, not that they were the only two Republican earmarks. My bet is on the fact that there are more Republican earmarks than there are Democratic.
Also loon Roger, did you protest each time Bush signed a Republican sponsored bill full of Republican pork? You didn’t? That’s what I thought.
November 14th, 2007 at 5:51 pmComment by judyinnm — November 14, 2007 @ 5:42 pm
Democrats are currently the Majority.
From his speech:
“Now, there’s a different philosophy in Washington. I’m not saying these aren’t good people; they are. They just have a different point of view. Instead of trusting in the judgment of the people, they trust in the judgment of the federal government. They believe in a federal solution to every problem — and somehow, that solution always seems to include raising your taxes. ”
snip
“And they’re not picky about how to raise taxes. To them, every bill on the floor is an opportunity for a tax hike. Congress has proposed tax increases in the farm bill, the energy bill, the small business bill, and the children’s health bill. If you find a bill that doesn’t have a tax increase, just wait a while — they’ll put one in there.”
He’s talking about the Democrats Judy. If he’s saying negative things that is.
November 14th, 2007 at 5:52 pmComment by pete — November 14, 2007 @ 5:47 pm
Oops! I forgot to add that it may take destitute oil execs jumping from skyscrapers. That might get the ball rolling. And, if you think it can’t happen, all it would take is the collapse of the dollar. That doesn’t seem very unreasonable at this point.
November 14th, 2007 at 5:53 pmIt’s the Holiday season - every time a bell rings, the democrats must be blamed for the issue du jour.
November 14th, 2007 at 6:01 pmYa didn’t see him badmouthing the “majority in Congress” who gave him that HUGE militarspending bill.
November 14th, 2007 at 6:08 pmWait a minute - Bush said the “majority in Congressâ€, and he’s right…
Comment by judyinnm — November 14, 2007 @ 5:42 pm
He did not say “the majority in Congress”. Go read the actual text. You can’t come to any other conclusion (that he was referring to the Dems).
He also got in a mention of “9/11″ right off the bat too. But what else is new? I wonder if he’s got it stitched into his underwear?
As far as “fiscal responsibility and spending priorities”? From this man?
I’d laugh, but it’s just not funny.
November 14th, 2007 at 6:12 pmearmarks are designated as political payback rather than a practical allocation of dollars to deal with a significant problem
Comment by SWBob
Thank you, you hit the nail on the head there.
They need to start doing what’s right for the country and not for payback to corporate/cronies/relatives/school chums, and that means both sides of the isle.
Opps, RxR remembered to take his stupid pills, he’s back on track. But I must say, he is less irritating than that a$$hole (s)hits.
Buck Fush
November 14th, 2007 at 6:20 pmThe Dems craft a bill with 2,000 earmarks and you find 2 earmarks you dislike. NICE!
Comment by Roger_Roger — November 14, 2007 @ 5:15 pm
Are you criticizing Bush? Because that’s EXACTLY what he did! Meanwhile, he had no problem with the THOUSANDS OF EARMARKS in previous REPUBLICAN CRAFTED BILLS - why’s that? AMNESIA or STUPIDITY?
And you WHINE about the Earmarks without knowing HOW MANY ARE REPUBLICAN out of that 2000? You poor stupid little ‘tard!
November 14th, 2007 at 6:28 pmAs a columnist pointed out in today’s newspaper, the irony of Bush’s whining is huge. Apparently, he didn’t even know earmarks existed, much less that they were a problem, until the Democrats had an edge in Congress. Prior to that, thousands of earmarks were included in the Republican-offered budgets without a single squeal from the White House.
What a pathetic, hypocritical liar.
November 14th, 2007 at 6:45 pmCaption contest:
You know, I never noticed before - but Mitchie doesn’t have a chin!
November 14th, 2007 at 6:48 pmWhen I read this I couldn’t help but think of the TRACTOR-TRAILERS they filled with cash to send to Iraq.
They measured its weight, didnt they?
Fiscal responsibility would be knowing where every pound (or dollar, but that would be asking too much) of dough went.
With that said, the whole earmark process is crap and needs to be monitored and set into the light of day — for both parties.
November 14th, 2007 at 6:51 pmAnybody for throwing the bums out.? Just asking.
November 14th, 2007 at 7:07 pmthink the stupid Americans outnumber the non-stupid ones. The trick is getting the stupid ones to vote in a non-stupid manner.
Comment by dim wit — November 14, 2007 @ 5:34 pm
——————-
How do we do that?
November 14th, 2007 at 7:17 pmWe heard not a peep out of Bush over spending for the 6 prior years when the amount in earmarks was even greater. This makes Bush a hypocrit of the first magnitude.
But that is not even the key issue. Bush owns the microphone so his spin hits all of the major news broadcasts. The truth is limited to the small audience of Blogs where the facts are at hand. And this is precisely why he does it all of the time.
November 14th, 2007 at 7:27 pmthink the stupid Americans outnumber the non-stupid ones. The trick is getting the stupid ones to vote in a non-stupid manner.
Comment by dim wit — November 14, 2007 @ 5:34 pm
——————-
How do we do that?
Comment by foreyes — November 14, 2007 @ 7:17 pm
Education? Persuasion? Emotional appeals? Reverse psychology? Waterboarding?
November 14th, 2007 at 7:49 pmThats my WAR money. Its mine all mine.
November 14th, 2007 at 8:28 pmThe majority was elected on a pledge of fiscal responsibility, but so far it’s acting like a teenager with a new credit card.
Says the man who wants trillions to play war in an area of the world that was no threat to us.
November 14th, 2007 at 9:51 pmDidn’t ole Mitch just release a new campaign commercial talking about all the money he’s secured for the University of Louisville?
November 15th, 2007 at 12:07 amPlease don’t resort to presenting selective favorable facts (aka Republican tactics).
So what if the two largest earmarks were from Republicans? What about total dollars spent? It should have been just as easy to present that number, and yet it was omitted.
One would guess because that number didn’t make the story quite so sensational.
Bush does plenty of crazy shit - if this case wasn’t strong when all of the facts are presented, perhaps it’s better to just move on to the next?
November 15th, 2007 at 11:01 amJust stop the spending for 12 months. Just stop.
I do not understand why the Democrats are playing into their games. Just stop the earmarks for 12 months - that is all. Go home to the people going into the 2008 elections and promote that Democrats STOP the spending spree.
Just stop - you will get elected - Not whether or not you paid back your donors. But the people will actually vote for you.
The Universities will survive, the tea cup museum will survive, the War Profiteers with their mark ups will survive. JUST STOP!
November 15th, 2007 at 11:18 amAnyway, I think the “majority in Congress” got elected more on the promise to get us out of Iraq and eliminating corruption, than on fiscal responsibility. Just saying..
November 15th, 2007 at 11:18 am