• Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.

GOP senators vote against their own earmarks

New posts
It isn't that he's "fine with it" it's that the alternative is worse.

From your article:

"We wish there were no earmarks and are troubled with their presence" in the $1.1 trillion omnibus spending bill, an administration source told ABC News. "But Secretary Gates has told the President that the alternative bill" - a continuing resolution that for one year funds the government, which is due to run out of cash at the end of the week - "doesn't have the funding critical for several national security priorities."
 
It isn't that he's "fine with it" it's that the alternative is worse.

I'm not against it, I have an ornament on that tree that has been vetted through years of analysis and study that is working itself through the Corps process. :D
 
Sounds like someone is crawling up on the cross knowing they aren't getting nailed to it.

The bill will likely pass, but they'll use it as an "I was against earmarks" campaigning point.


Exactly. Now they get to play it both ways depending on who they are campaigning and neither would be a lie.
 
Exactly. Now they get to play it both ways depending on who they are campaigning and neither would be a lie.

Only in politician land.

In Scooterbugland both the letter, spirit, and cumulative effect are considered and if you aren't telling the WHOLE truth, you are telling a lie.
 
Last edited:
The $1.1 trillion Senate omnibus bill contains 6,714 earmarks worth $8.3 billion.

The $48 Billion earmark story is completely false.

Reading comprehension got the best of many (yet again).

The Congressman in question posts ALL earmark requests his constituents make for review (in an effort to increase transparency).

This is NOT a list of earmarks Cleaver submits or that he has requested - not that you could tell that from the screaming from conservative bloggers.

Congressman Cleaver never made a request for a $48 Billion earmark and never considered doing so - because it was so ridiculous.

TO BE CRYSTAL CLEAR: They did not propose it, they did not promote it, they certainly did not submit it to the House Appropriations Committee, and it is NOT part of the bill.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/rep-cleavers-48-billion-earmark-fact-or-fiction/
​
 
Last edited:
New posts


Sign Up for SoWal Newsletter












                               
Back
Top