Saturday, March 14, 2009

An Attempt to Distract from GOP Hypocrisy

I don't know about the rest of you, but I am grateful to live in a technological age where we have video proof when people are *lying* through their teeth and misrepresenting other's words.

Case in point. The conservative media's new bone that Obama is "breaking a campaign promise to ban all earmarks".

If fact, Obama *never* promised to ban earmarks.

Take a look for yourself:

McCain repeated the no-earmark mantra for months during the campaign.

Honestly, I am not a math whiz, but eliminating one half of one percent of the Federal Budget does very little to balance that sheet in any way.

If the GOP is so against earmarks, why did so many GOP senators request money? [Click on 'version' 5 to see Excel spreadsheet.]

GOP Top Ten in the *solo and with other senators category* of earmark requests:

Number one: Thad Cochran (R-Mississippi): 472 million and change

Number two: Roger Wicker (R-Mississippi): 396 million and change.

Number five: David Vitter (R-Louisiana): over 249 million and change

Number six: Kit Bond (R- Missouri): 248 million and change

Number nine: Dick Shelby (R-Alabama): 219 million and change

Number ten: Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa): 199 million and change

Six out of 10 favoring the fiscally responsible GOP.

Dollar totals in top ten (rounded down to the nearest million):
GOP= 1.78 billion
Democrat= 1.08 billion

It's bad on both sides of the aisle-- but one party claims fiscal conservatism and "no-earmarks" as part of it's ideology.


driftwood March 14, 2009 at 2:22 PM  

Earmarks from Republicans? One of the many reasons I call myself a conservative and I want to see the party cleaned up. I want more representatives with conservative values in DC.

But there is also video proof of hypocrisy from Obama on the earmark issue.

skyewriter March 14, 2009 at 2:42 PM  

Thanks for the youtube link;
I believe he was referencing ARRA, not the Omnibus Bill, however.

He even uses the word "Recovery Plan" numerous times.

Although Fox has insisted (incorrectly) that ARRA was full of earmarks, indeed it was not.

Feel free to browse my archives for a line-by-line description of spending for the first eight titles.

skyewriter March 14, 2009 at 2:51 PM  

Another thing to keep in mind:

Most in Congress are in agreement on this point:

The Omnibus Bill is last year's business.

Obama had nothing to do with it's drafting...

Here's something that is (I think) unbiased about the coverage of the Omnibus issue:

As written in the final paragraph of that link:
"Most of the government has been running on a stopgap funding bill set to expire at midnight Wednesday. Refusing to sign the newly completed spending bill would force Congress to pass another bill to keep the lights on come Thursday or else shut down the massive federal government. That is an unlikely possibility for a president who has spent just seven weeks in office."

Electricfunk March 14, 2009 at 6:33 PM  

In one of the ironies of government Obama signed the Ombnibus spending bill which bans stem cell funding two days after removing the executive order that had banned it as well.

A better solution than blaming sides is to fire them all and start again, this time trying not to vote in liars and thieves.

skyewriter March 14, 2009 at 8:13 PM  

The Omnibus funding is effective only until September, 2009.

None of the appropriations were set aside during that time frame for stem-cell research, so technically you are correct, EF.

However, the ARRA legislation provides billions of dollars for medical research from NIH and NSF through 2012. Some of that research will be on embryonic stem cells.

It's misleading (as I read in the text on CSN) to claim that Obama "took funding away".

None was proposed to have been provided in the Omnibus.

Seeing Eye Chick March 14, 2009 at 11:37 PM  

The "Conservative Media" is counting on the fact that very few people have actually read these documents --other than a few nerds online and some poor aid in an office somewhere. Its doubtful even that the people passing this shit have bothered to even read it all.

That would indeed be a first.

Sidhe March 15, 2009 at 5:52 AM  

Seeing Eye is absolutely correct. The media, particularly the "conservative media" as she points out, is banking that we the people cannot distinguish between the various bills rolling through Congress these days. What's the difference between TARP, ARRA, Omnibus spending? Ask around and you'll find that most people have no idea except that it is the government spending their tax dollars.

Hell, even people who don't pay taxes will tell you that the government is unfairly spending their tax dollars to fund abortion, gay marriage, gays in the military, and a ton of other scary, scary things but they're happy to keep spending their monthly checks (even if they have to take out of their beer budget this month for a tea bag) and you better keep those unemployment extensions coming also because old-mr-joe-the-plumber isn't going to take any old job, he's too freaking good for McD's.

I think that just about every fat politician sitting in DC has been guilty of garnering earmarks at some time or other (perhaps particularly around election time) and the back-and-forth earmark blame game just identifies the biggest hypocrits. Time for Washington to start working and quit bitching, a little hand from the media would be nice but, hey, it's a free country right (despite the hard work of the prior administration & the Patriot Act) and they get to report it any way they want. I hope they don't expect to not get called out on it though...

Orters: slang term used to refer to a group of otters, presumably a reference to their vocal noises. March 15, 2009 at 12:27 PM  

Twisting words and distorting the truth. I wish Washington would worry less about spin and just get to work. It is so amusing that right wingnuts bitch about the dreaded mainstream media when they watch FOX News as if it was the word of God imprinted on Moses' tablets.

If people started doing a little independent research and analytical thinking we would be in a much better position to debate issues, but if you are just going to repeat talking points from Fox then what's the point?

  © Blogger templates ProBlogger Template by 2008

Back to TOP