Results 1 to 8 of 8
Thread: Earmarks
Hybrid View
-
03-02-2009, 04:27 AM #1
Earmarks
Looks like the Republicans are almost as addicted to earmarks as the Dems they are criticizing for being addicted to earmarks...click here
-
03-02-2009, 04:33 AM #2
-
03-02-2009, 04:36 AM #3
At least they're not trying to fund volcano monitoring. That's just silly!
-
03-02-2009, 08:59 PM #4
Well, actually the whole volcano funding issue was discussed in an article in Scientific American. Turns out it's not such a waste of money as some contend: click here
-
03-02-2009, 09:05 PM #5
One other point about earmarks. Depending on which numbers you believe, the total dollar amount of all earmarks constitutes only between 1%-2% of the entire FY budget. So even if all earmarks were eliminated, the proposed '09 budget would be virtually the same as with the earmarks.
Kind of makes you scratch your head as to why the Republicans are making such a ruckus over the proverbial "drop in the bucket" , particularly when a full 40% of the proposed earmarks are sponsored by ... Republicans!
-
03-02-2009, 09:11 PM #6
I know, I was being sarcastic. I think it's absurd not to monitor volcanoes.
This video at 6:30 is exactly my response to Gov. Jindal: Hulu - The Daily Show with Jon Stewart: Wed, Feb 25, 2009 - Watch the full episode now.
-
03-02-2009, 11:50 PM #7
No kidding. If the Yellowstone caldera blew, we'd be looking at extinction. The funny thing is this money includes other natural disasters like stream bed management to prevent floods. You know, the kind that trashed Jindal's own state when a hurricane hit and the resulting tidal surge/rain fall couldn't be contained.
-Rob
-
03-02-2009, 04:44 AM #8