1 Another Repuke cocksucker that just doesn't get it.

2 WTF is it gonna take for these ass-hats to get it. We are BROKE.

3 Another Repuke cocksucker that just doesn't get it. Posted by: Captain Hate at February 23, 2011 11:22 AM (MAC3t) My bet is that he doesn't read or post here ha?

4 Titanic. Deck chairs. Please arrange.

5 Meet the new boss, same as the old boss...

6 How about the "Government Stops Destroying the Country Act"?

7 Comments back up.

8 WTF when did "Pork" become non kosher?

9 If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck,
 
A Honey Badger should eat it.

10 @4 Splitters!

11 I dunno.  I think the explanation (about process) makes sense. 

I am not sure "earmark" = "pork."  You can have the latter without it being the former. 

Unfortunately, it looks like most voters love pork and they keep voting for the politicians who bring it home.  See Paul, Ron as the prime example of this. 

If the requests go through an approval process, then I think we have to live with it... and by that I mean we have to express our dissatisfaction with those sort of porky projects the way we would normally, by contacting our congress-critters and defeating the porkers at the polls. 

12
It's like they feel like they are entitled to raid our Treasury for their goddam whimsy.

13 Until the federal government gets back to what the Constitution requires of it...which isn't much...there has to be some method of funding projects such as interstates and multi-jurisdictional water projects.

I know it's just easier to call someone a cockholster, but that is where the Tea Party fails in policy. What is the alternative?  Without addressing that teh Tea Party will become as meaningless as the Libertarian Party.

14

You know what else?

Tell me why Inhofe or any friggin senator needs a goddam spokesman and a goddam staff?

15 Posted by: Y-not at February 23, 2011 11:29 AM (pW2o They are just buying votes. We need to replace them with people who do not think the way they do.

16

I'm torn Inhofe has been fighting the good fight when it comes to AGW.

I understand that our federal government does need to spend money on water, road, etc projects and that money is requisitioned through spending bills.

However, almost all money requested these days seems to be for frivolous spending projects

17

When they get to DC, they morph into politicians, even if they started out with some principles they eventually become one of 'THEM'. 

Back in the early days of the republic, didn't legislators serve for free, (i.e., they were volunteers/public servants in the true sense of the word)?

We are broke and need to reexamine that model once again.  When blood banks stopped paying winos for their blood, but instead asked decent people to donate blood, donations went up as did the quality of the blood.  We need to stop paying winos to go to DC.

18 They are just buying votes.

We need to replace them with people who do not think the way they do.
---

I agree with you.  I guess I just don't think Inhofe's explanation is that dishonest. 

But maybe I'm missing something. 

19 Posted by: Quilly Mammoth at February 23, 2011 11:31 AM (gQF+b) States can make agreements amongst themselves.

20 Don't worry, the special requests will be less than $61 billion, so the House won't mind. /crazyland

21

..... frivolous spending projects

That says it all, Ben.

22 Are these requests going to increase the overall (net) spending?  I thought they would be an allocation or reallocation of funds already committed to being spent. 

23 so are we allowed to call  inhofe a rino?

24 Man, they are so far removed from our reality. They're just getting what they can for themselves as The Republic collapses.

25 13 Until the federal government gets back to what the Constitution requires of it...which isn't much...there has to be some method of funding projects such as interstates and multi-jurisdictional water projects.

Yeah, it's called "regional coalition".  States do it all the time. And that's where it should be left.  Over and over again.  If these airholes want to flog money around at the local level they should run for City Council.  Targeted spending is pure vote-buying.  As is targeted tax cuts.  That's not the role of the Federal Government, and the States are not just administrative districts.

26

Y-Not, I agree it's not "dishonest" per se (Inhofe's explanation).  I'm arguing that it's "inadequate".

Perception is reality.

27 granted I may be arguing it poorly.

28
in b4...

"it doesn't matter because the money comes from discretionary funds and is essentially already 'spent' money"

29 If it is something that affects us all, like an interstate highway or a nuclear reactor, then fine. But I'm pretty damn sure we don't all need the James Inhofe Navel Gazing Observatory or the Ted Kennedy Monument For Waitress Sandwiches.
 
Many of these projects are for local use, and should be funded locally or not at all.

30 19 Posted by: Quilly Mammoth at February 23, 2011 11:31 AM (gQF+b)


States can make agreements amongst themselves.

Posted by: eman: United People's Front of Wisconsin at February 23, 2011 11:32 AM (VmVG3)

Yes, they are known as "Compacts". Every multi-state compact that I know of is mainly funded by Federal funds...because that's who has all of our tax money.  In the case of the WRDA most of it is prioritizing projects  outlined by the Corps of Engineers.

31 I agree it's not "dishonest" per se (Inhofe's explanation).  I'm arguing that it's "inadequate".

OK.  I'm slow today. 

It is hard to be in a state that went first in tossing out its porker (Bennett).  I think Orrin will be next.  The prospect of having two junior senators when you're in a state that is heavily "owned" by the federal government (and therefore limited in how you can generate revenue) is tough.  But our governor is starting to make the federal land grab a standard part of all of his speeches now.  We are fortunate to have a good governor. 

32 So sad.  Inhofe is teh awesome on the global warming issue and he was very high on my list of guys who should run against Obama.  Like many once fine conservatives, he has been in Washington way too damn long.

33 there should be no such thing as spent money before a project has even begun....funds should be allocated for a project and the UNSPENT MONEY RETURNED.......we need to stop this moronic mentality of emptying the bank account just because it's there.....talk about waste......

34

If it is something that affects us all, like an interstate highway or a nuclear reactor, then fine. But I'm pretty damn sure we don't all need the James Inhofe Navel Gazing Observatory or the Ted Kennedy Monument For Waitress Sandwiches.
 
Many of these projects are for local use, and should be funded locally or not at all.

That's where I am torn. Government spending isn't evil, it's just what they are spending it on is.

A lot of great things were paid for with government dollars. The Interstate system, the Hoover Dam, etc.

However, when was the last time we built something the benefited most of the population with government money?

 

Instead its all used as buy offs for certain segments of local constituencies.

35 Tell me why Inhofe or any friggin senator needs a goddam spokesman and a goddam staff?

You actually expect me to READ this crap? Come on, who does that? It's not that important!

36 Senate Rule 66: In the event of Jedi officers acting against the interests of the Republic, and after receiving specific orders verified as coming directly from the Supreme Commander (Chancellor), GAR commanders will remove those officers by lethal force, and command of the GAR will revert to the Supreme Commander (Chancellor) until a new command structure is established.

Wow. I guess we need to pay more attention to these Senate Rules.

37 @30
rotflmao

38 i don't begrudge them staff....but the staff better be party approved.....and better fall in line with the party's beliefs

39

But I'm pretty damn sure we don't all need the James Inhofe Navel Gazing Observatory or the Ted Kennedy Monument For Waitress Sandwiches.

If they make the Ted Kennedy Center for Drunken River Swimming, I'll donate the first $100 to its fund.

40 Hopefully the House will squash this shit.

41 Fiefdoms rule!

42 Clowns to the left of me Jokers to the right Here I am Stuck in the middle with Youse Guys

43 I've heard that Sen. Lieberman decided not to run again because his faith prevented him from directing pork to his state, but his liberal domestic tendancies demanded that he do so....

44

Great, it looks like Walker got prank called.

Look, Republicans, if someone calls you up and says there someone famous, get some sort of confirmation first. This will be an endless loop on the news.

45 An argument can be made for the highway system being within the Constitution since that would be a "postal road", however local water systems are defintiely not covered.

That is where the line should actually be drawn. Trying to determine something artificial like the definition of an "earmark" is dangerously close to calculating the number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin.

Determining what is authorized by the Constitution only requires that you be able to read English.

46 Great, it looks like Walker got prank called.

If you believe Ben at Politico. Those people are notorious liars and I don't believe them for shit.

47 Walk like a duck
Spend like a schmuck

48

Great, it looks like Walker got prank called.

If you believe Ben at Politico. Those people are notorious liars and I don't believe them for shit.

I'm sure it was taped. It will be released obviously.

49 Determining what is authorized by the Constitution only requires that you be able to read English.

Posted by: Vic at February 23, 2011 11:50 AM (M9Ie6)

AND that you be a wise Latina.

50

That's where I am torn. Government spending isn't evil, it's just what they are spending it on is.

 

As a person who has had to suffer through all manner of Dick Durbin pork, trust me -- even when it initially looks good on paper...it usually turns out to be a big old shit sandwich down the road.

Any deluded American voter who stills gets the blushing giggles for senators who bring the pork to their state should be forced to study the sort of porking Dick Durbin has foisted off on IL. (this either turns you into an incredibly shell shocked voter, much like a Chicago Cubs fan always waiting for "next year", or an incredibly cynical one who kinda winds up like that badger, but the latter does have its benefits: not believing a word from government is probably a good skill at this point).

51 Determining what is authorized by the Constitution only requires that you be able to read English.

Posted by: Vic at February 23, 2011 11:50 AM (M9Ie6)

Multi-state water projects.  How do you do those when the only way a State may enter into a Compact with another State is if it is approved by Congress? The approval of such compacts and the funding for them has always fallen under "General Welfare". 

"and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States"

Navigable waterways and other water related endeavors have been done under this since the adoption of the Constitution.  So how, in simple english, do you define what is "General Welfare"?

52 If the money must be spent, put it in a stand-alone bill, debate it and vote on it. Part of the problem is this whole "the money's already authorized to be spent" bullshit. The reason the process is broke is because "spending bills" authorize little actual directed spending. They simply allocate X number of $ towards a certain agency and then said agency spends it how they like, as in all the wasted, frivolous bullshit we're all tired of seeing. After they blow all their money on bullshit, they're back with their hands out, asking for the money they need to actually run their real, actual shit.

53 #53 Yes, that would be a great way to handle it.  That way it can never be hidden regardless of what it is called.

54

none of the people with the ability to change anything has the desire or spine to actually change anything.

United States of America meet - brickwall

Brickwall meet - United States of America.

55 So how, in simple english, do you define what is "General Welfare"?

The "general welfare" clause is abused bullshit. It was never intended to be anything more than the things listed in Section 1, art 8. list.

56 I'd defer ALL spending on this kinda shit unless some dam is literally ready to collapse and flood a town/city.  Maintain what we got, all other projects get put on hold.

57 Several possible solutions -- make any 'earmark' into an NGO that taxpayers can direct a portion of their tax bill to support and prohibit anything more than matching funding of such projects from the federal government.   Any excess funding or NGOs that fail to get a minimum level of funding to operate would go back to the general fund (IRS)...

In other words, if I owe $10,000 in taxes and Senator Dufus adds an 'earmark' to set up an NGO to build a bridge built over a Lake Dufu that I'd like to see, I can donate perhaps $1000 to fund the Dufu bridge project and have my tax bill I send to the IRS cut down to $9000.  If Dufu bridge doesn't get enough $$$ to get going, it's dead... 

Then allow CongressCritters to designate all sort of existing programs as NGOs and let them live or die according to what taxpayers want to see. 

Since the politicians don't seem to be able to manage multiple overlapping, inefficient programs and departments, set up a system that allows the politicians to punt most anything into NGO status so that taxpayers make the tough choices...  You know, stuff like the Dept of Education....  EITC...  HeadStart...  Medicaid...  The options could be limitless.  

58 Why bother, fracking is poisoning so much of our underground supply?  Ignore those earthquakes, Arkansas.

59 Hi.NHL Jerseys on sale,buy your favarite NHL Hockey Jersey for you.the best team :Chicago Blackhawks Jerseys and Pittsburgh Penguins Jerseys .

60 Thank you for this article.