So, if you're someone whose advice Obama/Biden actually take seriously, how do you suggest they deal with this one? Quick! Don't wait until they actually respond to respond!
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/23/biden.earmarks/index.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
3 comments:
I will say something substantive later, but I wanted to ask a simple question first. Are there good and bad earmarks? If so, what's the standard for distinguishing the good from the bad? Or are all earmarks bad?
Good earmarks are those that go to your district.
Bad earmarks are those that don't.
Actually, I should expound. I wasn't trying to be flipant with that last post,that IS one standard to go by. Interesting political discussion arises, however, when you get politicians like Tom Coburn (R-Ok), who was mentioned in the story, who campaign on an "anti-pork" platform, fighting waste in Washington to protect the taxpayer (another way of looking at it). Coburn's Democrat counterpart in the Okla. contingency, however, is constantly pointing out, "Tom, we're a poor state. If we don't earmark the money, someone else will." (Coburn has been described as California's best lawmaker, even though he ostensibly represents Oklahoma). The odd situation for Obama/Biden is: In voting against the Coburn amendment and for the bridge, they were helping out Palin's state, and now they're being called on it. How do you respond to that?
Post a Comment