McCain fumes over 9,000 earmarks in omnibus budget: ‘If it seems like I’m angry, it’s because I am.’
McCain fumes over 9,000 earmarks in omnibus budget: ‘If it seems like I’m angry, it’s because I am.’
During a presidential debate last fall, Barack Obama made an emphatic pledge on earmark reform: “When I’m president, I will go line by line to make sure that we are not spending money unwisely.” Now, the Obama administration is urging Congress to quickly pass a $410 billion budget that contains 9,000 earmarks in order to keep the government running for the rest of fiscal 2009. Yesterday on the Senate floor, John McCain (R-AZ) — who frequently railed against earmarkers on the campaign trail and pledged to “make them famous” — fumed over the Obama administration’s stance:
“If it seems like I’m angry, it’s because I am,” McCain said, taking the White House to task for treating the bill as leftover business — and not subject to the full measure of earmark reform promised by candidate Obama.
“Last year’s business?” McCain asked, incredulous. “The president will sign this appropriations bill into law. It is the president’s business. It is the president of the United States’ business. It is the president of the United States’ business to do what he said — stated — when we were in debate seeking the support of the American people — where he said he would work to eliminate earmarks.”
Watch it:
McCain, who did not request any earmarks himself, said, “I want to freely acknowledge that Republicans were guilty of this as well.” Indeed, Republican leader Mitch McConell “has more than $75 million worth of earmarks in the omnibus spending bill.” Obama, Rahm Emanuel, Joe Biden, and Ken Salazar also have earmarks in the bill. As ThinkProgress has previously noted, some earmarks serve very vital purposes.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
I’m confused…the setup for this thread casts McCain in a positive light and Obama in a negative light…I am sure I am missing something….
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:10 amuh, nobody is watching your grandstanding anymore jackass.
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:11 amThis morning on NPR I heard McCain railing about a few million dollars going to research on termites.
You’d think someone who owns seven houses would want to prevent termite infestation…
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:13 amhere’s what i don’t understand about earmarks…
how is it a bad thing to have earmarks in the stimulus package.
an earmark is just a way to make sure specific funds are spent on specific things. without earmarks there is no direction in order to accomplish the goals of the administration.
without earmarks there wouldn’t be any sort of unified effort in which the country acts as a whole with some direction from the top.
how would it be better to just give all this money to the states with no direction what so ever on how to spend it?
what would the point of that be?
how would the administration get anything done?
if the administration builds a school its an earmark, bridge-earmark, highway-earmark, funding of an outreach program-earmark, and so on and so forth.
why are republicans so afraid of doing things?
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:14 amArizona residents have one really big beef with McCain: He doesn’t bring home any pork. It would be great to see him get knocked off by a D promising more federal dollars for things like public parks and hospitals.
http://www.pufferfishblog.com/
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:15 amJust how many Rethuglic earmarks were in the budgets from 2001-2006?
Let us count the ways.
just asking.
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:17 amMcCain doesn’t need any earmarks. He doesn’t care if the people of Arizona are miserable. He gets all his campaign money from Cindy and buys his way into the senate every 6 years. Other members of congress have to try to provide their voters with needed services that provide jobs to locals but these rules don’t apply to Gigolo McCain.
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:18 amNo wonder Rahm danced so hard and Bob Scheiffer looked so confused by Emanuel’s answer on earmarks:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2008805055_rahmbo03.html
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:18 amUncle Ho, there’s lots of Republican earmarks in this budget. McCain forgot the campaign is over.
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:19 amObama did say he would go line by line and now here’s a bill that wasn’t gone thru line by line.
One person’s needed earmark is another person’s idea of pork. These earmarks may be needed (and I’m going to go thru them) but this doesn’t put Obama in line with his campaign promise.
I commend TP for showing this.
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:20 amWow stateofthedivision, I thought you said you were only attacking Obama because of your involvement in the healthcare industry.
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:20 amThe earmarks add ZERO addl $$ to this budget. This is a stop-gap spending measure. McCain is grandstanding so as to not become insignificant.
We have enough right-leaning media outlets giving McCain too much time. Please, TP, do not bow to this as well.
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:23 amIt does ring a little hollow that republicans are hollowing about the 9,000 earmarks when they are asking for 40% of them.
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:23 amFUN to see the Republicans squealing about Republican-style business as usual.
Is McCain over or under-medicated, I can never decide.
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:24 amThis budget was written last year and needs to be passed relatively quickly to provide funds for the government. What Obama said was that from now on he would supervise the budget process to make sure there was no wasteful spending. BUT especially now when they are looking for projects to spend money on to stimulate the economy is it a good idea to stifle every project that somebody else thinks is unnecessary. “Pork barrel projects” and “earmarks” provide jobs and cash to local economies. Just because McCain thinks they’re a bad idea doesn’t make it so.
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:25 amMcCain’s right.
Obama did say one thing and do another. No matter what justification that he uses, Obama is allowing earmarks to go through on this budget.
We, as progressives, need to look at both sides and when our side is wrong, we need to freely admit it.
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:28 amI agree Shayne. This bill wasn’t written by Obama. But the timing of it couldn’t be worse.
Does anyone know if this bill had even more earmarks at one time?
For Obama to sign this without going thru it line by line as he promised is going against his campaign promise.
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:29 amWashington Monthly has a better post about this.
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:30 am
I’m sure McCain has a “wink wink nod nod” agreement with Kyl that Kyl requests all earmarks for Arizona. Kyl gets to look like the guy who brings home the bacon and McCain gets to maintain his mavericky anti-earmarks posture.
I look at this guy and am so thankful that he isn’t our president.
PEACE
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:35 amGrandpa McCain just wants to have something to bytch about. If he wants to bytch about earmarks, pork and wasteful spending – he should start with his own rethuglican party. Or just go consult with Rush the Lush – the new face of the GOP!
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:35 amOld man yells at the clouds, again!
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:39 amI am a staunch defender of Obama and despise McCain however I feel a little let down that these pork barrel projects were included in this budget. It doesn’t matter to me if they were last year’s business or submitted by Dems or Repubs, it is still pork. It seems to me that Obama made a decision not to start a fight over the pet projects since he definitely has bigger fish to fry, but he did promise no more pork.
Having said that I would suggest Sen McCain stop looking for holes to embarrass and chide this president. Perhaps McCain should forget he lost and get on with the business of trying to put this “country first” which was HIS campaign promise.
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:40 amThe president isn’t allowed to do a line item veto is he? If he can’t then the whole budget would have to be overhauled and my understanding is there are time constraints.
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:40 amGrumpy old MkFuk just doesn’t get it. As long as the earmarks are transparent, and stimulating the economy, no problem…
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:43 amraynman Says:
——————————————————————————–
McCain’s right.
===========================================================
So you even understand that the bill goes through the house and the senate and committee before the president gets it? I read rants and I read stuff that is stupid but give the process a chance to work. The president has not signed the bill yet. Earmarks have been a process used for a long time for representatives to “earmark” funds for their districts. Some of this is muchado about nothing.
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:43 amhellinabucket Says:
For Obama to sign this without going thru it line by line as he promised is going against his campaign promise.
________
And what would that accomplish?
Obama could go thru line by line (9,000 lines???) but he doesn’t have a line item veto. A lot of this is prolly quid pro quo trading by the Congresscritters who put it together. Obama could refuse to sign it, but he can’t cut individual earmarks, can he?
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:43 amaquarius2 Says:
I am a staunch defender of Obama and despise McCain however I feel a little let down that these pork barrel projects were included in this budget. It doesn’t matter to me if they were last year’s business or submitted by Dems or Repubs, it is still pork.
________________
have you looked at all 9,000? Do you KNOW what they all are?
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:44 amEverybody wants their own earmarks they just don’t want anybody else to get theirs. Right now Obama WANTS government spending money to make up for all the money they cut out the last 30 years. McCain/Palin lost the election, remember.
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:46 amIn the past six weeks we have heard the rethugs complain about everything under the sun, sometimes howling at he moon, without ever suggesting anything to help this country get out of the worst financial crisis ever, that they helped create. I think it proves that they are the party of no, and the party of un-patriotic cowards who are not for the country but are for a failed philosophy.
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:47 amShayne, you are probably right but don’t you think that someone in the Obama administration would have had a meeting with the majority leaders and asked to take something out? Or would that have opened up pandora’s box?
The more I think about it that’s probably the thought process. The bill was written before he was president. This does need to pass quickly and, from what I’ve been able to research so far, most of the earmarks do inject funds locally.
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:47 amObama promised to go line by line through the budget to see make sure money wasn’t being spent unwisely. He isn’t doing it on his first budget. Now we are being told that the process will be reformed “going forward.” Well, this is forward of the last budget. If nothing else, they could produce a separate document and list each member of congress and list their “earmarks” to bring to the light of day what is happening.
This feels like “business as usual” and another effort by Obama to get congressional support so he can call in the favor when he needs it later. We already know that the Repubs will take what they want and continue to work to make Obama “fail.”
If these projects are “how we get things done” at the state and local level, then they should be part of an overall plan. Show us the plan and how each “earmark” works to accomplish the goal of the plan. That’s the problem. There is not overall plan. It is simply congressional members sending money to their states or districts to help insure re-election.
I voted for and support Obama, but the USA is in a fiscal crisis created, in part, by the folks who love earmarks. It is time for fincal discipline, not business as usual.
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:48 amThe entire cost of all these earmarks, Rep and Dem, is approx. $8.1 billion.
Or, more simply stated, less than the cost of one month in Iraq.
PEACE
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:50 amMcCain is mad. Nothing new to see. Move on.
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:51 amRaptureReady Says:
Under McCain, we would have instantly cut the deficit.
__________
Conjecture, and therefore meaningless.
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:52 amMalik Says:
The democrat of Stupidity
Have you read even 1 of them?
________
Excuse me? Who the F are you?
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:53 amHere’s the breakdown of the bill
It doesn’t go into great detail for each earmark but it does give a brief description, the department(s), the person who requested it and more.
More than enough information for both sides to cheer and jeer.
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:55 amRaptureReady Says:
This is not a funny time. The last thing that we should be doing is lavishly spending Government money. It hurts our economy. Why do you want us to fail?
__________
Funny… I don’t recall you complaining about Botch’s endless deficits, which just shipped money OUT of the country endlessly.
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:55 am…as the Maverick, standing in his own feces, loudly proclaims ‘Something stinks!’
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:55 amMalik Says:
I am Malik. Have you read any of the pork bill?
_________
Just what I’ve seen in the papers.
Why the F do I care who you are or what you think?
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:56 am#29 Republic of Stupidity
No, I haven’t been able to find a site that lists these projects. The ones I have knowledge of are put out by the media and seems to be the old “one man’s meat is another man’s poison” scenario. I am sure there are some dubious projects and I wish Obama had the time and resources to address those. I believe he will in the future but for right now he has larger problems than this small percentage of the national budget.
I have a bigger problem with McCain trying his damndest to embarrass this president.
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:58 amLooks like Malik’s purpose in life is to support Fixed Noise.
Congrats, what a useful purpose your life’s path has chosen!
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:01 pm/snark
aquarius2 Says:
#29 Republic of Stupidity
No, I haven’t been able to find a site that lists these projects. The ones I have knowledge of are put out by the media and seems to be the old “one man’s meat is another man’s poison” scenario. I am sure there are some dubious projects and I wish Obama had the time and resources to address those. I believe he will in the future but for right now he has larger problems than this small percentage of the national budget.
I have a bigger problem with McCain trying his damndest to embarrass this president.
_______________
That was kind of my point. I have no doubt there are some dubious projects in the bill. There always are. Someone here just posted a link to the bill. Try reading it. Sweet HAY-sus, it’s complicated. That’s part of the problem. How do you rein in your lawmakers?
Just calling it “pork” doesn’t really help. It’s kind of what got us into this mess. Clever sound bites make it easy to complain but don’t really accomplish anything, huh?
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:02 pmUnder McCain, we would have instantly cut the deficit.
and there would have been dancing and unicorns as he saved us from our financial difficulties!
why hasn’t he told us how to get osama bin laden yet… he said he knew how on his campaign trail, but he still hasn’t told anyone. whats the deal?
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:02 pmMalik Says:
Asked and answered….
__________
Wow… you’re… you’re “really” “sharp”…
Incredibly impressive display of… of… huh… what point were you making?
Apparently NONE.
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:04 pmRaptureReady Says:
This is not a funny time. The last thing that we should be doing is lavishly spending Government money. It hurts our economy. Why do you want us to fail?
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:50 am
____________
Do explain how government spending hurts the economy during an economic recession. There are a great many Nobel Prize-winning economists who disagree with you.
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:04 pmRaptureReady Says:
Those who agree with massive spending are traitors to America.
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:02 pm
_____________
What do you have against capitalism, Jesus freak?
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:05 pmPoor poor ruptured…You lost. Whine on..This is not a funny time. The last thing that we should be doing is lavishly spending Government money. It hurts our economy. Why do you want us to fail?
It isn’t going to hurt the economy spending government money, it’s going to stimulate it.
Oh, I forgot, your degree(sic) is from Oral Roberts. Obviously no requirement for Econ 101.
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:07 pmWHO THE HELL CARES IF JOHNNY MCDIAPERS IS ANGRY?
THAT GUY WAS AND IS STILL A JOKE!
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:07 pm-
Message: He cares. And he’s angry.
-
In the immortal interview words for the Original Bozo the Clown, pestering a kid for a response in the microphone on live 1950s New Jersey TV: “Cram it, Clown.”
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:07 pmOver 6,300 earmarks are for $500,000 and less. And over 2,500 of these are under $200,000 so the number of earmarks may be alarming at first, but,as Shayne pointed out, many of the money will be going to provide cash to local economies.
I still believe the timing is bad and this does go against his campaign promise but I don’t see the justification for outrage by the republicans when they are responsible for 40% of the earmarks and the money will be widely dispersed.
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:08 pmRaptureReady Says:
We were at war fighting terrorism.
____________
Back to framing you already lost over. How do you fight a tactic? Or an emotion? Botch’s “War on terror” was an enormous miscalculation. And we were all just supposed to go shopping, huh?
____________
This is not the time to implement wing-nut initiatives.
____________
I’m not even sure what this means.
____________
It is time to save our economy. Those who agree with massive spending are traitors to America.
____________
Funny… I would have thought the traitors were the ones openly hoping for the President, and therefore the country, to fail.
You’ll have to excuse me if I don’t take the economic opinions of someone waiting to be “raptured up” seriously.
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:08 pmhellinabucket Says:
I still believe the timing is bad and this does go against his campaign promise but I don’t see the justification for outrage by the republicans when they are responsible for 40% of the earmarks and the money will be widely dispersed.
______________
What is Obama supposed to do? He doesn’t have a line-item veto.
What is a realistic way to rein this sort of spending in?
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:10 pmWrong, McCain would be bomb, bomb, bombing Iran and getting us into another, bigger, costing us $2 trillion this time. But you don’t have a problem throwing money away for unnecessary wars just spending it on what people need here.
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:14 pmRaptureReady Says:
Under McCain, we would have instantly cut the deficit.
Hahaha, too funny RR. Care to explain how staying in Iraq for 100 years and lowering taxes on corporations and the mega-rich would accomplish this end?
Oh right, you can’t.
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:17 pmRR:
WE ARE SPENDING PHANTOM MONEY, WHICH DEVALUES THE DOLLAR. THIS CAUSES SEVERE INFLATION, WHICH MEANS THAT CONSUMERS AND SOME BUSINESSES STRUGGLE TO BUY PRODUCTS IN OUR VOLATILE MARKET.
What if the phantom money is spent on the holy ghost?
Where is Venkman when we need him?!!?
Gosh you are a clown RR.
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:18 pmNot all earmarks are a “bridge to nowhere”. Lots of these projects are needed. It’s childish to assume, as Grampy McSame does, that all of them are throwing money away. Where termites are a problem houses need to be inspected before mortgage lenders will fund them. McCain thinks termites are a joke like Bobby Jindal thinks volcanoes are a joke.
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:19 pmRepublic, There isn’t much of an option and, thru further investigating the earmarks themselves, I’ve come to the conclusion that earmarks don’t equal pork for most of this bill.
Rightly or wrongly this bill will give the GOP ammunition against Obama. It’s now upto his administration, the leaders in Congress and Obama himself to counter their complaints. I’ve liked how Obama has been dealing with the GOP so far and I don’t think I’ll be let down now.
I’m pretty sure there will be another message from the White House to explain the positives of this bill, point out the bill was written before Obama took office and restate that this administration will be keeping a closer look at the bills created while he’s in office.
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:21 pmDoes anyone have a site that lists what each of these state by state earmarks represent? I followed hellinabucket link and it tells who and how much but unless I screwed up I don’t see what.
Politicians are terrific at pointing out “frivolous” earmarks but very selective in their idea of “frivolous”.
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:21 pmCattle are earmarked, too.
Where’s the Mavericks’?
He should have an RFID tab on his ear just so Cindy knows which pasture he’s wandering into next.
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:21 pmHere’s the information on how the line item veto was briefly enacted and then repealed.
The right wingers would have you believe that Obama can get rid of any item that’s frivolous but he can’t.
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:23 pmDemocrats wanted to cut the budget for aides to Republican senators because their is less of them they’d need less people. But the Republicans wouldn’t allow it. There’s a bunch of pork for you.
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:25 pmHere you are aquarius2
database
Look under the earmark tab and sort by state
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:25 pmruptured rectum says; those who agree with massive spending are traitors to America
I trust you are including Ronnie Ray-gun, Pappy Bush, and chimpy jr in that.
If not, you are a pious hypocrite and a lying sack of shit.
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:27 pmhellinabucket Says:
Republic, There isn’t much of an option and, thru further investigating the earmarks themselves, I’ve come to the conclusion that earmarks don’t equal pork for most of this bill.
___________
I have to agree w/ you. I’m not sure aht Obama’s realistic options were. Go thru all 9,000 and dicker w/ each Congresscritter? How long ago was this bill initiated/ How long did it take to make its way to Obama’s desk?
I do find it impressive that after 8 years of one of the most profligate presidencies in thsi countyr’s history, and one they did NOTHING to rein in, all of a sudden the GOOP are screaming “Fiscal responsibility”, and all whilst making sure they get their fair share for their leeching red state welfare constituents, to boot.
_______________
Rightly or wrongly this bill will give the GOP ammunition against Obama. It’s now upto his administration, the leaders in Congress and Obama himself to counter their complaints. I’ve liked how Obama has been dealing with the GOP so far and I don’t think I’ll be let down now. I’m pretty sure there will be another message from the White House to explain the positives of this bill, point out the bill was written before Obama took office and restate that this administration will be keeping a closer look at the bills created while he’s in office.
____________
You really can’t safely stop a train quickly. I find it rather annoying that the GOOP is screaming and wringing their hands over this they way they are, but hey, what do you expect?
Hey… mebbe what we REALLY need are some more tax breaks… and another war or two… and then we can all just go shopping.
Now, if GOOPers want to talk about reducing Fed handouts to RED STATES…
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:31 pmShayne Says:
The right wingers would have you believe that Obama can get rid of any item that’s frivolous but he can’t.
___________
EXACTLY…
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:31 pmhellinabasket
Thanks. When the page opened it was just the amounts and I missed the earmark tab. Interesting reading.
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:31 pmIf John McCain is angry then something is going right.
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:31 pmover 7200 of the earmarks acount for 2.4 billion. So the number of 9000 EARMARKS!!!!! doesn’t have the same bite as the GOP would want us to believe.
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:46 pmSurge and earmarks appear to be the only thing mcsame care about!
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:53 pmRapture Ready:
First, he never meant that we would be in Iraq for 100 years. He stated that we would not leave without victory. Second, significantly lowering taxing on corporations keeps jobs here and stabilizes our consumer base.
Neither answer expounding on your bold declaration that under McCain the deficit would instantly disappear, nice try.
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:58 pmShayne Says:
Not all earmarks are a “bridge to nowhere”. Lots of these projects are needed. It’s childish to assume, as Grampy McSame does, that all of them are throwing money away. Where termites are a problem houses need to be inspected before mortgage lenders will fund them. McCain thinks termites are a joke like Bobby Jindal thinks volcanoes are a joke.
Exactly Shayne. It is just classic politicization of a term to vilify it. Earmarks are easy to say, pork is easy to ridicule. Neither ever fully explain the role they play in appropriating funding for state level projects.
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:00 pmHere is a nice graph which shows the number of earmarks by the Republican Congress since 1994. Note the dramatic decline in 2006 and 2007, when the Democrats gained control.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2401/2215075689_06153384df.jpg
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:02 pmShut up, angry old Loser.
Forget about “getting off your lawn” – I’m gonna pee on it!
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:02 pmBy “here”, you must mean China.
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:02 pmIn my limited understanding, it is a tricky thing to justify line-item vetoes as any more Constitutional of a practice than Bush’s use of signing statements. I guess it would need to be framed in very specific legal language to ensure the powers ascribed would not allow the President to literally re-write a bill that has passed Legislature.
Any thoughts?
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:03 pmtombaker says;
oooh, I’ll see your pee on McInsane’s lawn, and raise you a turd. :-)
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:07 pmLine item vetoes are totally unconstitutional.
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:08 pmshoeless Says:
Line item vetoes are totally unconstitutional.
So do you think there is any way to word a legal motion to provide more checks and balances on the system of awarding earmarks?
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:11 pmWhy not just crash another plane? And the economy with it? Republicans need a depression to totally break the middle class and take what’s left of their freedoms, their homes, their wages. Gramps should be sitting in one of his houses yelling at the boob tube.
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:12 pmCongress has to police itself in that regard. The executive branch is not allowed to write legislation.
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:18 pmMcCains angry because he forgot his Depends.
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:18 pmJohn McCain is a cranky old man, shaking his cane at the Dem’s, shouting, “Get offa my Lawn!!” He should be wearing Bermuda shorts, hitched up under his chest, and dress shoes with arygll socks. Don’t forget the porous nylon dress shirt with his chest hairs peeking over the top of his wife-beater undershirt.
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:34 pmI am a supporter of Prez Obama but I find this omnibus bill stinks. I agree with poster #23, 33, & 66.
My main argument is that we need to hold the line on spending. I don’t care if you want to include earmarks (because congress needs pork), but we have to cap the growth in spending. A 10% increase is not acceptable when we just passed a $780B stimulus bill. we have to cap spending at last year’s level.
I don’t buy the argument that this is “last year’s budget” and that “spending is necessary for local economy.” If prez obama signs the bill, it is his responsibility to make sure that it is right. Besides, this bill will undercut his fiscal credibility. all the talk about going through the budget “line by line” is just empty talk if he does not carry it through.
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:39 pmWill someone please escort him OFF the stage? His performance STINKS. This is nothing but “look-at-me-I’m-important” tantrum.
loser !
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:43 pmJohn McCain doesn’t understand that earmarks are necessary: There’s nothing wrong with pork
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:50 pmSenator McCain deserves to enjoy a comfortable retirement. He could amuse himself trying to keep track of how many houses and cars he owns, and stop bothering everybody with his rhetorical nonsense.
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:59 pmHe always seems like he’s angry.
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:12 pmAfter breaking down the numbers for FY2009 Omnibus Earmarks, here are some interesting conclusions:
Republicans put forth the majority of solo earmarks in volume: 52.32% to 47.16% AND in value 51.41% to 47.41%
Democrats led the way in earmarks proposed by other members + solo earmarks, but since the numbers are combined it is hard to see which earmarks are truly team efforts. At least, the numbers aren’t specific for that certain type of earmark, which I would guess might benefit more than one constituency?
Senators who did not participate in solo earmarks OR earmarks with others were basically the same for both parties: 4 R’s and 3 D’s.
The number of Democrats who did not submit any solo earmarks is 14, and for Republicans this number is 7.
Anyone who wonders why the R and D %’s don’t add up are excluding the two I’s: LIEberman and my beloved Sen. Sanders.
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:27 pmSince President Obama doesn’t have the “line item” veto, he can’t take out what he thinks is wasteful spending. And failing to sign this Omnibus bill will bring our government to a halt. This is not the time to shut down the Federal government.
McCain is just blowing smoke as usual.
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:15 pmstateofthedivision Says:
No wonder Rahm danced so hard and Bob Scheiffer looked so confused by Emanuel’s answer on earmarks:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/ html/ politics/ 2008805055_rahmbo03.html
Continuing down the road of troll stardom I see. Keep it going. You have exposed yourself for who you really are.
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:17 pmJvS Says:
John McCain doesn’t understand that earmarks are necessary: There’s nothing wrong with pork
There is something wrong with pork (wasteful earmarks), but nothing wrong with earmarks themselves.
I would like to see President Obama have Congress introduce one or two “structured spending” (earmark) bills a year and shine the light of day on them. Have a website that lists the earmark, who asked for it, who benefits from it and how much it is. Then take public input (public meaning the people in the districts involved) on the projects. Other than that, he should forbid earmarks being attached to any other bill.
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:21 pmJoeBridgeman Says:
I am a supporter of Prez Obama but I find this omnibus bill stinks. I agree with poster #23, 33, & 66.
So, would you like President Obama to veto the bill and shut down the Federal government at a time when we are in crisis. That doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. But since this bill should have been passed in October of last year and Bush pushed it off on Obama, if he vetoes it the government will soon be issuing IOU’s and become non-functional.
I’m sure that’s what the right would love to see happen.
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:23 pmHelp me out folks. I am sure how to address obama going forward. Should he be called “Liar in Chief” or “Commander in Lies?”
Here it is, straight from his own mouth. HE SAID NO EARMARKS!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZAXLhkAwl8
AND, SUPRISE SUPRISE … HERE ARE THE EARMARKS…
http://www.earmarks.omb.gov/ 2009-appropriations-by-spendcom/ summary.html
Ohh, but I can already hear the obama apologists and water carriers now saying … “It’s not really a lie because obama said it. Or … He is such a nice and trustworthy man and would never lie to the people. Or … It is only a lie when a republican says it.”
Folks, the bottom line is that He is a Harvard Trained Liar … er’, I mean, lawyer. Now be honest, have you EVER met a lawyer that you trusted? If so, then you are either naive and too trusting or you encountered a one in a million chance meeting.
The only lawyer that I ever met that I even remotely trusted was an x-lawyer who quit the practice because of integrity issues. Basically, he could not keep practicing law the way it was done in Chicago in good conscience. Apparently, obama does not have that problem.
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:52 pmOh Tim43…this budget was crafted BEFORE Obama was elected and he does not yet have line item veto power over the budget.
If, God forbid, McCain had won the same earmarks would still be in the omnibus.
Try again, thanks.
March 3rd, 2009 at 4:07 pmBiden shot down the earmark = pork meme in the Vice Presidential debate, if I remember correctly. This does make me wonder what Obama meant by “going line by line”. We’ll see how this plays out in Congress. Looking at the dollar tags on the earmarks themselves, though, I must say that they look pretty specific and not extravagant.
March 3rd, 2009 at 4:19 pmThe only lawyer that I ever met that I even remotely trusted was an x-lawyer
– Weird the only republican I ever met and even remotely trusted was an x-republican. Weird how when you paint with a large brush your art is of a single hue isn’t it?
March 3rd, 2009 at 5:32 pmBut he ALWAYS seems angry.
March 3rd, 2009 at 6:10 pmWhat on earth does any of this have to with “Americans being out of work”? McCain acts as if every dollar spent on an earmark is one not given to a potential worker. When, in fact, it is the exact opposite.
These earmarks are for actual projects. This money will go to wages and materials. Those workers will go out and buy things and pay some of the money back in taxes. People will make the materials those projects require and those workers will do the same.
I thought we heard enough about this nonsense during the campaign.
March 3rd, 2009 at 6:44 pmHe tried to base his campaign on this and lost, give it up already.
March 3rd, 2009 at 8:39 pm______________________
stHrt.com
Change Your Home Page
http://sthrt.com
No, John, there’s no seeming about it. You definitely come off as an angry person. Unfortunately, all Republicans seem to have his disability so don’t too bad about it. There’s a theory floating around that your anger may be a source of your mental problems. Have you weighed that theory?
Have you ever heard about anger-management classes, John? I know it’s difficult for Republicans to join these classes (because they seem to “get-off” on their anger), but courage is a quality Republicans show every day. Anyway, they say so.
Next time you feel angry, you should watch the final scene in “Psycho”, where Tony Perkins resists the temptation to kill an honest, innocent fly.
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:41 pmTHere can be no pet pork projects in this project because president sotero/obama said there wasn’t.
I guess the nation really does need that train from las vegas to disneyland? Thanks democratic harry reid. Wunder if his lobbyist sons got a piece of that pie.
Now, for the other 8,999 not pork says sotero/obama projects…
March 4th, 2009 at 12:05 amSpeaking of children, now Limba calls the President of the United States to a rumble after school. I guess he really is the new leader of the republics.
March 4th, 2009 at 4:14 pmMcCain always picks the wrong way to attemp to be relevant. Whatever he’s thinking it’s off target.
March 4th, 2009 at 4:16 pm