PDA

View Full Version : Embarrassing Pork spending



eg8r
03-27-2007, 09:52 AM
After reading this web page (http://www.examiner.com/a-640957~Senate__emergency__war_bill_has_almost__20_ billion_in_domestic_spending_tacked_onto_it.html), I have to admit this is shameful for both parties. Actually it is disgusting... [ QUOTE ]
Like their counterparts in the House, the Senate has larded its version of an “emergency” war spending bill with nearly $20 billion in pork-barrel outlays, including $100 million for the two major political parties’ 2008 presidential conventions.


The $121 billion bill includes $102 billion for the troops fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as $14 billion for Hurricane Katrina aid and more than $4 billion for “emergency farm relief.” ...

The $100 million for the political party conventions — $50 million for the Democratic convention in Denver and $50 million for the Republican convention in St. Paul, Minn. — is included in a section described as “Katrina recovery, veterans’ care and for other purposes.”
<hr /></blockquote> The actual issue with pork spending has already been mentioned because it is just horrible that the Dems are adding all this pork to the bill (remember they promised to reduce all the pork spending, they were going to do the right thing. Liars). What blows my mind is that they are spending $20 billion in addition to the money W asked for, all after criticizing W for asking for more money. Hypocritical? There is no other explanation.

However, I am getting off track. Included in the pork is this 100 million going to party political conventions. This is absolutely 100% wrong. The amount is evenly divided so both parties are at fault and this is just completely wrong. First W gets blasted for asking for more money, and what is their response to the request for more money...Sure we will give it to you if you let us take 100 mill for ourselves. Just disgraceful.

eg8r

wolfdancer
03-29-2007, 01:51 PM
Got to agree with you there......

Gayle in MD
04-05-2007, 08:26 AM
Seems to me that bush's sudden outrage over earmarks, and pork, is a bit hyocritical, as well.

2006 (from Citizens Against Government Waste)
_$46,908 for Hampton Jitney, Inc. (Wow. People still use the old timey word "jitney?")
_$500,000 for the Arctic Winter Games
_$1,000,000 for the Water-Free Urinal Conservation Initiative
_$1,000,000 for the CLOSED Philadelphia Navy Yard
_$5,600,000 for the Ernest Gallo Center (wine and alcohol research)
_$3,400,000 for the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program, "which was initially designed to capture energy from the aurora borealis [northern lights], but is now being configured to heat up the ionosphere to improve military communications." (I'm wondering if heating up the ionosphere is such an awesome idea. Then again, this earmark came from Senator Ted Stevens.)
_$8,270,000 for breath alcohol testing equipment
_$10,000,000 for the Rural Domestic Preparedness Consortium (to prevent terrorists from attacking that banjo kid from Deliverance)

2005 (from Citizens Against Government Waste)
_$200,000 for the Military-Civilian-Education and Sexual Health Decision-Making Program (Condom, Private Pyle?)
_$1,000,000 to restore Woody Island and historic structures
_$1,000,000 to eradicate Brown Tree Snakes
_$1,603,084 in handouts to the hugely profitable Greyhound Bus company (2004)
_$5,000,000 for the U.S. Secret Service National Special Security Event Fund (this is for the Secret Service to protect Super Bowl football players)
_$5,000,000 for the CLOSED Bayonne Military Ocean Terminal (used by Royal Caribbean cruise ships, the movie A Beautiful Mind and the TV show Oz)
_$5,500,000 for the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (Stevens really wants a damn hot ionosphere)


I think the Democrats made it clear that the present earmarks, by and large, were left over from last term, and were actually unfinished Republican business, which they used in an effort to protect, and defend our troops, from the Bush/Republican refusal to do so, and in an effort to give the American People, what they have been asking for, for some time now. IOW, this spending amounts to a political bribe, on behalf of our troops, in an effort to end this ridiculous, unreasonable policy in Iraq, which the majority of us want to do.

Also, missing in the debate, is that this President, with the support of his party, has beaten down our soldiers, without proper R &amp; R, Equipment, and/or training, the same people, over and over, and against the treatment standards which the military manuals demand, and followed that by cutting funding for Veterans.

When it comes to spending, the Republicans have certainly brought it to a new level, according to statistics. it will be interesting, though, to see how the Democrats measure up over the long haul. it is a bit early to make that judgement, IMO, after only a few months.

Gayle in Md.

DickLeonard
04-05-2007, 08:45 AM
Eg8r I think the political convention funding was put into law. Giving both parties an equal amount of pork. You don't think the Democrats would have gotten any funding in 2004?####