29 January 2008

Recovering from W's Address on "The State of the Union" (2)

In The Times today is an article nicely pointing out the sheer hypocrisy of W's tough talk last night on 'ear marks'; not only are ear marks a tiny portion of the overall federal budget (dwarfed, for example, by insane levels of funding for the Iraq fiasco now and into the future) but W didn't peep about ear marks while his Republicans controlled the Congress. Let's set aside the issue of whether the projects funded by ear marks are admirable or not; after all, funding for W's war in Iraq is in the text of this or that funding bill (hence is not an ear mark) and is mostly indefensible. W played this issue for the applause meter and his Republican cronies obliged. In fact, the threats he issued to use vetoes and executive orders to control ear mark spending are hollow. So, what W offered is hypocrisy with a bullshit garnish.



Anonymous Dawei from Beijing said...

When you're right, you're right, Jim! Ear marks make up barely 1 percent of the budget. If you eliminated all ear marks -- which is not possible, anyway -- you would save a whopping $18 billion dollars a year. That's how much we spend on Iraq in a few weeks. Clearly, tightening the belt on ear marks only serves one purpose -- to punish democrats.

29 January, 2008 11:58  

Post a Comment

<< Home