GOP Flake Out (GOP wants its share of pork)

WSJ.com ^ | February 19, 2008 | Editorial

[EveningStar]

House Republicans have been taunting Democrats for turning down their offer to eliminate spending earmarks, and Democrats reply that the GOP isn't serious. The Republicans seem intent on proving that Democrats are right, as GOP leaders showed last week in denying Arizona's Jeff Flake a seat on the Appropriations Committee...

[EveningStar]

Is anyone really surprised?

[trumandogz]

For the Democrats, Earmarks were only a problem when the Republicans controlled Congress.

What Hypocrites!

[squidly]

A lot of Freepers don’t want to hear it, but McCain is the best defense we have against runaway spending. He was the lone voice in the wilderness against it during the Bush years.

[sinanju]

After all, what are we gonna do, throw them ALL out?

Nyah! Nyah! Nyah!

[mnehring]

Any listing on the Rs that voted against him?

[highball]

For the Democrats, Earmarks were only a problem when the Republicans controlled Congress.

And for Republicans, they're only a problem now that the Democrats control the show.

There's plenty of hypocrisy on both sides. We've even had FReepers defending the "bridge to nowhere". Just because a Republican was the one ladling the pork.

[trumandogz]

There's plenty of hypocrisy on both sides.

Really?

Wow, I am in shock.

[EveningStar]

TaЯd ping!

"Tard" refers to the ping list members and not to the subject of the thread!

List of Ping Lists

[M203M4]

The fight to reduce wasteful discretionary spending is important, but it amounts to almost a distraction compared to the problem with entitlement spending.

Reducing pork-barrel spending is good governance, shows respect for the taxpayer, and is important for the economy overall. However, dealing with entitlement spending is important for the very survival of America as a nation.

Unfortunately, to most candidates, this spending is off limits, and, at best, we are instead assuaged with promises to staunch the bleeding in quantities of pennies in the stead of the dollars required.

[rob777]

"A lot of Freepers don’t want to hear it, but McCain is the best defense we have against runaway spending. He was the lone voice in the wilderness against it during the Bush years."


I have my problems with McCain, but his record on spending is not one of them.

[eclecticEel]

Earmarks are a tiny drop in the bucket compared to the real spending crisis we face.

[org.whodat]

He was the lone voice in the wilderness against it during the Bush years.

Is that why he wanted to spend 4 or 500 billion on illegals????

[Eva]

McCain’s objections to spending were only an excuse for throwing road blocks into the Republican agenda. Spending had nothing to do with his reasons for blocking the tax cuts at that time.

[PhilCollins]

I’m not surprised. My congressman is Mark Kirk, an IL Republican who is more liberal than many Democrats. He votes for a lot of unconstitutional pork barrel spending, so that his district can get money for a commuter train line, head start, and local police departments. I e-mailed him, three times, and I asked which article, of the Constitution, authorizes that spending. I didn’t receive a response.