While I agree that they are overplyed my McCain there is some shady shit in some earmarks. Notably here are a couple good examples of using earmarks to benefit family members and friends and themselves:
10. Senator Harry Reid (D-NV): Over the last few years, Reid has been embroiled in a series of scandals that cast serious doubt on his credibility as a self-professed champion of government ethics, and 2007 was no different. According to The Los Angeles Times, over the last four years, Reid has used his influence in Washington to help a developer, Havey Whittemore, clear obstacles for a profitable real estate deal. As the project advanced, the Times reported, "Reid received tens of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from Whittemore." Whittemore also hired one of Reid's sons (Leif) as his personal lawyer and then promptly handed the junior Reid the responsibility of negotiating the real estate deal with federal officials. Leif Reid even called his father's office to talk about how to obtain the proper EPA permits, a clear conflict of interest.
9. Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA): House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who promised a new era of ethics enforcement in the House of Representatives, snuck a $25 million gift to her husband, Paul Pelosi, in a $15 billion Water Resources Development Act recently passed by Congress. The pet project involved renovating ports in Speaker Pelosi's home base of San Francisco. Pelosi just happens to own apartment buildings near the areas targeted for improvement, and will almost certainly experience a significant boost in property value as a result of Pelosi's earmark. Earlier in the year, Pelosi found herself in hot water for demanding access to a luxury Air Force jet to ferry the Speaker and her entourage back and forth from San Francisco non-stop, in unprecedented request which was wisely rejected by the Pentagon. And under Pelosi's leadership, the House ethics process remains essentially shut down — which protects members in both parties from accountability.
Ted Stevens has too many violations to go into here on how his earmarks have benefitted his offspring. I would compare a lot of earmarks to these no-bid contracts as most are specifically targeted to a single corporation that does not have to compete for the money they get. The really bad ones give the worthwhile ones a very bad name. Just my 2 cents.
10. Senator Harry Reid (D-NV): Over the last few years, Reid has been embroiled in a series of scandals that cast serious doubt on his credibility as a self-professed champion of government ethics, and 2007 was no different. According to The Los Angeles Times, over the last four years, Reid has used his influence in Washington to help a developer, Havey Whittemore, clear obstacles for a profitable real estate deal. As the project advanced, the Times reported, "Reid received tens of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from Whittemore." Whittemore also hired one of Reid's sons (Leif) as his personal lawyer and then promptly handed the junior Reid the responsibility of negotiating the real estate deal with federal officials. Leif Reid even called his father's office to talk about how to obtain the proper EPA permits, a clear conflict of interest.
9. Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA): House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who promised a new era of ethics enforcement in the House of Representatives, snuck a $25 million gift to her husband, Paul Pelosi, in a $15 billion Water Resources Development Act recently passed by Congress. The pet project involved renovating ports in Speaker Pelosi's home base of San Francisco. Pelosi just happens to own apartment buildings near the areas targeted for improvement, and will almost certainly experience a significant boost in property value as a result of Pelosi's earmark. Earlier in the year, Pelosi found herself in hot water for demanding access to a luxury Air Force jet to ferry the Speaker and her entourage back and forth from San Francisco non-stop, in unprecedented request which was wisely rejected by the Pentagon. And under Pelosi's leadership, the House ethics process remains essentially shut down — which protects members in both parties from accountability.
Ted Stevens has too many violations to go into here on how his earmarks have benefitted his offspring. I would compare a lot of earmarks to these no-bid contracts as most are specifically targeted to a single corporation that does not have to compete for the money they get. The really bad ones give the worthwhile ones a very bad name. Just my 2 cents.
And that, my friend, is what's wrong with the whole system. It's all about ME ME ME. That's why the Federal budget is out of control.
Earmarks are only a symptom of the whole big problem - it goes much deeper. The Congressman in Mississippi who makes sure that the Government funds construction of a ship the Navy doesn't even want because the shipyard that builds it is in his district. The guy in Florida who gets a new courthouse built for his political buddy the judge. the Senator from Georgia who makes sure the army base in his state doesn't close. And on and on and on and on....
And if these guys won't take on the few special interests who lobby for the earmarks, how in the hell are they going to do anything about the entitlements that have constituencies of millions, and which are really bankrupting the country.
Fuck NO !!!
We have hundredes of congressman out there pillaging our pool of money. We have thousands of stinking lawyers and lobbyists out there taking from that american pot of output. Everybody is stealing that money and I want nobody to be doing that.
Handing out money for different casues is NOT the role of the federal government. That is what pisses us off.
If your state or county needs money for X project, run a bond, raise taxes, collect revenue, legalize gambeling, raise a sales tax... just don't make other americans pay for your damn highway, courthouse, poor housing bill, baseball stadium, fam subsidy, wildlife study, etc. etc. etc.
No shock at all that you are a democrat. You have no party with a collection of looters and lawyers stealing from US taxpayers. Your political party has no aim, no objective, no central idea, just to give to the giant coalition of people.
The gays
The unions
Hollywood
The liberal educators
The tax the rich crowd
The enviornmentalists
The poor blacks
Teachers unions
Catholics
All of the groups banding together to grab more of the economic pie at the expense of everybody else.
The gays
The unions
Hollywood
The liberal educators
The tax the rich crowd
The enviornmentalists
The poor blacks
Teachers unions
Catholics
All of the groups banding together to grab more of the economic pie at the expense of everybody else.
Another corrupt example:
Hastert could well be the weakest House speaker in history. Tapped by Tom DeLay to serve as the mild-mannered frontman for the GOP leadership, the former wrestling coach ceded most of his power to the now-disgraced majority leader, allowing Republicans to treat the Capitol as their private piggy bank. Last year, Hastert got in on the action himself, secretly inserting $207 million into the budget for the "Prairie Parkway" -- a highway that will speed development of 210 acres he owns in Illinois. Before the year was out, Hastert sold part of his land -- soon to be the site of a sprawling subdivision -- for a profit of $2 million.
"Here's a guy who saw a chance to profit from his official acts and took it," says Bill Allison, who uncovered the late-night earmark as a senior analyst for the Sunlight Foundation, a nonpartisan watchdog group. "Most of us aren't speaker of the House, and most of us don't have a $200 million earmark running through our back yard. Hastert does, and he made a fortune from it."
Another good trade off from Hillary, you scratch her back and she'll scratch yours:
Hillary Clinton's $1 million earmark for a museum to celebrate the 1969 Woodstock music festival could become one of the biggest issues of the 2008 campaign. Not only does it anger the culture conservatives who see Woodstock as nothing more than a bunch of pot-smoking naked hippies, but even the people with fond memories of the rock festival must acknowledge that a museum is not exactly the best symbol of its meaning, and that a million dollars should be spent by pandering politicians for this project. The Woodstock earmark was voted out, 52-42, on October 18, 2007, making it one of only two earmarks to be voted down (the other was $129,000 for the home of the perfect Christmas tree project in North Carolina).
The Woodstock earmark raises further questions about the corrupt system of obtaining earmarks. On June 21, 2007, Clinton and Charles Schumer's $1 million earmark for the Woodstock museum was approved by a Senate committee. Nine days later, billionaire Republican Alan Gerry, the driving force behind the museum, donated (with his wife) the maximum of $9,200 to Clinton's presidential campaign. That same week, Gerry and his family gave $20,000 to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee run by Schumer. Since 2005, the Gerrys have donated $18,600 to Clinton.
And one from Obama that coincided with his wife receiveng a $190,000 raise, nearly tripling her salary:
The Times reported that the list of requests “included $1 million for a hospital where Mr. Obama’s wife works, money for several projects linked to campaign donors and support for more than 200 towns, civic institutions and universities in Illinois.”
Again using earmarks for personal gain is unethical and there is little doubt this has been the norm in DC. Notice that there are very few earmarks that benefit the middle class and the working poor by any of these politicians, mostly larger companies. Why do you suppose that is? Maybe because they get more bang for their buck in return by gifting money to the bigger businesses. Just filthy politicians IMO
Hastert could well be the weakest House speaker in history. Tapped by Tom DeLay to serve as the mild-mannered frontman for the GOP leadership, the former wrestling coach ceded most of his power to the now-disgraced majority leader, allowing Republicans to treat the Capitol as their private piggy bank. Last year, Hastert got in on the action himself, secretly inserting $207 million into the budget for the "Prairie Parkway" -- a highway that will speed development of 210 acres he owns in Illinois. Before the year was out, Hastert sold part of his land -- soon to be the site of a sprawling subdivision -- for a profit of $2 million.
"Here's a guy who saw a chance to profit from his official acts and took it," says Bill Allison, who uncovered the late-night earmark as a senior analyst for the Sunlight Foundation, a nonpartisan watchdog group. "Most of us aren't speaker of the House, and most of us don't have a $200 million earmark running through our back yard. Hastert does, and he made a fortune from it."
Another good trade off from Hillary, you scratch her back and she'll scratch yours:
Hillary Clinton's $1 million earmark for a museum to celebrate the 1969 Woodstock music festival could become one of the biggest issues of the 2008 campaign. Not only does it anger the culture conservatives who see Woodstock as nothing more than a bunch of pot-smoking naked hippies, but even the people with fond memories of the rock festival must acknowledge that a museum is not exactly the best symbol of its meaning, and that a million dollars should be spent by pandering politicians for this project. The Woodstock earmark was voted out, 52-42, on October 18, 2007, making it one of only two earmarks to be voted down (the other was $129,000 for the home of the perfect Christmas tree project in North Carolina).
The Woodstock earmark raises further questions about the corrupt system of obtaining earmarks. On June 21, 2007, Clinton and Charles Schumer's $1 million earmark for the Woodstock museum was approved by a Senate committee. Nine days later, billionaire Republican Alan Gerry, the driving force behind the museum, donated (with his wife) the maximum of $9,200 to Clinton's presidential campaign. That same week, Gerry and his family gave $20,000 to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee run by Schumer. Since 2005, the Gerrys have donated $18,600 to Clinton.
And one from Obama that coincided with his wife receiveng a $190,000 raise, nearly tripling her salary:
The Times reported that the list of requests “included $1 million for a hospital where Mr. Obama’s wife works, money for several projects linked to campaign donors and support for more than 200 towns, civic institutions and universities in Illinois.”
Again using earmarks for personal gain is unethical and there is little doubt this has been the norm in DC. Notice that there are very few earmarks that benefit the middle class and the working poor by any of these politicians, mostly larger companies. Why do you suppose that is? Maybe because they get more bang for their buck in return by gifting money to the bigger businesses. Just filthy politicians IMO
GTC, your position is equivalent to saying you'd support a pickpocket from your neighborhood heading out to the downtown mall to find some victims and sharing his booty with the neighborhood.
Don't be surprised if the victims don't agree with the position.
You could say that the other guys also have a chance to get earmarks, which is like saying they can go and be pickpockets themselves.
Yes they can, but they're smart enough to know time spent pickpocketing one another is time wasted because nothing is getting created in the process. People are all spending time and energy yet the total amount of wealth is not increasing. That's not beneficial for society.
Don't be surprised if the victims don't agree with the position.
You could say that the other guys also have a chance to get earmarks, which is like saying they can go and be pickpockets themselves.
Yes they can, but they're smart enough to know time spent pickpocketing one another is time wasted because nothing is getting created in the process. People are all spending time and energy yet the total amount of wealth is not increasing. That's not beneficial for society.
But the big boys dont need to go into town to pick my pocket.
They can sit at a comfy desk in an office and charge me all kinds of bank and 401k fees and there's not a thing I can do because they are part of a legalised pickpocket cartel backed by the government.
:grandmais
It's all relative.
That's just a logistical thing, Eek. Technically people can avoid getting pickpocketed by voting for a Ron Paul, say. The fact that they don't means that there are more guys who want to pick others' pockets than guys who want to avoid having their pockets picked. As long as they admit it I can hardly blame 'em. It's when they think they're somehow being righteous that I start losing any interest I might have had in helping their cause.
GTC- This is one of the biggest corruptions to the entire system. I can't believe you don't know about this. We have foxes in the hen house stealing money. No wonder you are a democrat.
eek- If you are unhappy with your bank or 401k provider, it is very easy to switch banks or 401k providers... they are business. They are held responsible by customers. If you are unhappy with being robbed by your taxes, it is very difficult to switch countries, and they all have their problems too.
eek- If you are unhappy with your bank or 401k provider, it is very easy to switch banks or 401k providers... they are business. They are held responsible by customers. If you are unhappy with being robbed by your taxes, it is very difficult to switch countries, and they all have their problems too.
Not to mention how he sits in front of his computer for 12-14 hours a day with little gap between his liberal rants. When do you ever go to a class? When was the last time you went out with a woman, or man to be liberal and politically correct? Do you have a job? Any friends at all? Seems like a sad lonely life you lead.d1g1td1g1td1g1td1g1td1g1td1g1td1g1td1g1t
It might not be a big deal to you ( You don't pay taxes as a grad student ????), but it sure as shit bothers us who WORK.
It isn't the government spending some random money, it is the government wasting OUR money... US as in WORKERS, TAXPAYERS, not the daytime TV crowd watching springer, people's court, and Oprah.
who the hell is meltdown, im 90 percent sure he's a ghost for therightside. he's saying i am logged in all day. i never log out, and i have up 20 pages at once when im on the net so it'll say im here even if im not paying attention to the site.
its freaky though that this guy cares that much about my life. one of his posts he asked me for my address. im like dude, you cant be serious.
asking if i have a girlfriend, my job and crap like that. damn internet stalkers.
its freaky though that this guy cares that much about my life. one of his posts he asked me for my address. im like dude, you cant be serious.
asking if i have a girlfriend, my job and crap like that. damn internet stalkers.
