Look Who Has Huge Earmarks
It’s not just some Democrats, as Republicans would have you believe, but Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (right, with co-porker Thad Cochran) who has more than $75 million worth of earmarks in the omnibus bill. Some fine example he’s setting for those irresponsible, big-spending Democrats.
The earmarks McConnell asked for in the omnibus include $950,000 for the Western Kentucky University bikeway project, $427,000 for the Gunpowder Creek trail in Boone County and $1.6 million for the Forage Animal Production Research Laboratory in Lexington.
In total, McConnell has received 53 of the earmarks he requested, totaling $75.5 million, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense, a nonpartisan group that tracks federal spending.
So, the next time a Republican friend starts whining about pork in the stimulus bill, mention Mitch McConnell and see the reaction. In fact, six Republican senators are among the top 10 porkahalics, lead by Republican Thad Cochran of Mississippi. The Taxpayers for Common Sense database shows that Cochran got dough for drinking water and wastewater projects, mosquito-trapping research, and beaver management and control. Cochran is responsible for 204 earmarks worth $471 million, which makes McConnell look like a piker.
Other Republicans on the top-ten hit parade are David Vitter of Louisiana, Kit Bond of Missouri, Richard Shelby of Alabama, and Senator Roger Wicker of Mississipi.
I have said it all along Mitch is MR. PORK BARREL !
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:59 am
be careful what you argue for…it might just make you look like a fool.
Is the south really that horrible a place that you need to raid the federal coffers to pay for projects.
Also, I’m not sure if drinking water and wastewater projects are really pork ,earmark sure, but those are things that I don’t mind my tax dollars paying for, although it would be nice if they raised the money locally, but that’s one thing that we should be willing to help out with.
There is no reason the federal gov. should be paying for bike paths.
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:36 pm
great…more politicians doing what politicians do. I say that President Obama should fire each and every one of these senators who have earmarks in this bill…it was, after all, President Obama who said he would end earmark spending.
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:39 pm
Alan, I knew I liked you, so glad you left Hannity. I just love the terms: Co-Porker and Porkaholics! I wonder who in the Republican Party will be doing the “oinking” next?
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:54 pm
Alan, interesting you would choose the “with others” numbers over the solo numbers as the basis for your post. Officially, the Dem Robert Byrd, from WV has the highest solo earmark total.
And as solo goes, it’s 5 to 5 in the top ten.
I’m absolutely NOT taking one side or the other in this case as I think all 9000 earmarks should be ousted…but I thought I’d give “the rest of the story.”
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:08 pm
Good for you, Kit Bond! Go out with a bang, my old friend! “You be da man!”
Frankly, I can’t find any beef with any of the earmarks I’ve heard about so far. I get p.o’d over congressional travel and wasteful spending, more than anything. Public works, in my opinion, mean we actually get some of our tax money returned to US, rather than to public works in, say, the Middle East or Africa.
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:14 pm
Jared:
Alan didn’t say democrats didn’t have earmarks. The problem is the republicans are the ones whining about all the earmarks. He’s simply pointing out the hypocracy.
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:15 pm
“Obama should fire each and every one of these senators who have earmarks ”
Obama can’t fire a senator, senators are elected officials from their states. I believe only the senate by majority vote can kick out other senators…fat chance of that ever happening.
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:17 pm
GUIDO,
I was definitely being facecious with that statement.
TDRO,
I understand the point of the post, but I felt it necessary to point out the numbers that Alan didn’t. That’s all.
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:18 pm
I figured as much…but it just sounds dumb.
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:27 pm
” understand the point of the post, but I felt it necessary to point out the numbers that Alan didn’t. That’s all.”
It’s not the earmark spending I have issue with, it’s the blatant hypocracy of these senators.
I’m reminded of the time Newt Gingrich took time out from screwing his whore behind his wife’s back to accused Clinton of “immoral behavior”
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:46 pm
McConnell’s Kentucky is sucking money out of the treasury at a rate of $1.51 for every dollar paid in taxes. That’s the ninth highest rate in the nation.
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:15 pm
TDRO, Calista Bisek Gingrich wasn’t a whore, she was a congressional “aide.” More like an extramarital aide, yes, but you know, Gingrich has repented so his serial philandering slate is wiped clean, I suppose.
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:28 pm
Gingrich repented so his serial philandering slate is wiped clean…until the next affair surfaces. Just thought I’d add that.
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:15 pm
This is almost as hypocritical as:
- a presidential candidate who pledges to reduce the role of lobbyists in Government, but hires a slew of them to form his administration
- a presidential candidate who pledges to oppose earmarks, but agrees to sign a bill chock full of them
- a president who puts a man who refused to pay his taxes in charge of increasing the tax burden on others
Perhaps we should be asking whose nose is growing….
March 3rd, 2009 at 4:15 pm
Also, I’m not sure if drinking water and wastewater projects are really pork ,earmark sure, but those are things that I don’t mind my tax dollars paying for, although it would be nice if they raised the money locally, but that’s one thing that we should be willing to help out with.
There is no reason the federal gov. should be paying for bike paths.
POSTED BY GUIDOVANHORN
So it’s ‘pork’ when a Democrat starts it and agrees with it and it’s useful spending when a Republican starts it and agrees with it? By your standards if anything that might be useful becomes ‘non-pork’ then something like infrastructure spending and civic improvement like bike paths are just fine. Make up your mind. Are earmarks only earmarks when we are talking about Obama days?
March 3rd, 2009 at 4:44 pm
This is almost as hypocritical as:
- a presidential candidate who pledges to reduce the role of lobbyists in Government, but hires a slew of them to form his administration
- a presidential candidate who pledges to oppose earmarks, but agrees to sign a bill chock full of them
- a president who puts a man who refused to pay his taxes in charge of increasing the tax burden on others
Perhaps we should be asking whose nose is growing….
POSTED BY JOHN G.
So how do you propose to get anything done in washington without lobbyists? A magic wand? Your awesome ideology just making everyone so happy they don’t need a lobby to represent them?
All politicians talk about no earmarks these days but not many of them have the balls (Obama included) to tell people they are being stupid when they cry and moan about earmarks. Without earmarks the money wouldn’t move fast enough to do any good. Each project would be sitting on their hands waiting for money for months, maybe years, before they saw a dime. Responsible use of earmarks is how govt is suppose to work. Go back to school.
Hahahaha! Paying his taxes … that’s a joke. You ever not paid your bills perfectly on time? You ever jay-walked? You should never be able to tell anyone that they can’t the law and should be ashamed when you decry murderers and rapists. You obviously are a perfect human being and have every dollar you ever made all tied in a bow for the IRS to come take away.
Your just an Obama-hater. This is politics not a gossip hour. Get your facts straight and try again. The only ‘noose’ we are dealing with is the one Bush threw around our necks and slowly Obama is cutting it apart. You should thank him for restoring your nation to some of it’s former pride.
March 3rd, 2009 at 4:51 pm
So it’s ‘pork’ when a Democrat starts it and agrees with it and it’s useful spending when a Republican starts it and agrees with it? By your standards if anything that might be useful becomes ‘non-pork’ then something like infrastructure spending and civic improvement like bike paths are just fine. Make up your mind. Are earmarks only earmarks when we are talking about Obama days?
Posted by EricG
my definition of pork is wasteful spending, not all earmarks are pork. the federal government should be open to funding certain things, drinking water and wastewater systems are IMPORTANT parts of infrastructure. Bike paths are not.
and I think both of my examples were of Republican earmarks….think before you post.
If you go back and look at my views on many subjects you’ll see that I don’t fit in as a neat little conservative republican, I’m more conservative than you I’m sure, but I do try to keep an objective outlook at things.
I’m all ears to a persuasive argument, I’m not an immovable object of ideology. I’ve agreed on many things that were not right about the previous administration but I’m not going to say that George W. Bush was wrong on everything…because he wasnt’ and if you look objectively at it, you’ll come to the same conclusion.
Now, I do have some deeply held beliefs that I will defend, and it will take more than petty insults and name calling to get me to change my mind, I’ll reiterate “I’m all ears to a persuasive argument, I’m not an immovable object of ideology.”
March 3rd, 2009 at 5:03 pm
ERIC,
Wasn’t it you who was busting Joe the Plumbers ba11s for not paying his taxes? Or was that someone else?
March 3rd, 2009 at 5:06 pm
[...] Do Republicans have a double-standard on earmarks? Alan exposes the real Party of [...]
March 3rd, 2009 at 6:00 pm
EricG – I never proposed that Washington could operate without lobbyists. OBAMA did. It was part of the change he promised but can’t possibly deliver, because his view of good government is big government. The bigger government gets and the more money it controls, the more susceptible it will be to special interest groups.
If you believe that “Responsible use of earmarks is how govt is suppose to work” you must think that Obama is an idiot, cause he promised to eliminate earmarks.
If you want to move money fast, put it in each and every citizen’s hand. Let the consumers spend it. I work with gov’t procurement agencies every day and can tell you that nothing happens quickly with amount of red tape they have to cut through.
I don’t hate Obama, he’s just misdirected. What noone seems to acknowledge is that Obama not reversing the Bush policies that got us into this predicament – he’s expanding them. Take the deficit that he’s whining about inheriting. Yeah, its a big problem that Bush did nothing to help. But, Obama’s not reducing it, he’s expanding it. How is a small deficit bad, but a bigger deficit good?
Think for yourself for once.
March 3rd, 2009 at 6:15 pm
We are in debt another $1,500,000,000,000 (Trillion) since January 20, 2009.
We are now funding abortions in foreign lands.
Our $13 a week so-called tax cut is going be incluced as earned income on our 2009 tax returns.
We are apparently going to turn our backs on our friends in Poland and Czechoslovakia by not installing a missile defense system.
We are closing Gitmo with no idea where we are going to put the enemy combatants.
Dow has plummeted over 3000 points since Jan. 20, 2009.
We are going to increase taxes on small business during a recession.
We are going to raise the corporate tax during a recession.
Anyone making $250,000 or more will see a tax increase, during a recession.
Capital gains taxes are going to go up, during a recession.
I really hate to say this about an American president, but I don’t think President Obama has a clue what he is doing. Or maybe he does. He is either naieve or is grabbing for absolute power. Either way it is very scary.
Oh, all the above has taken place just since January 20,2009.
Just think, only three years and 10 months or so left in his first term. LOOK OUT!!!!!
March 3rd, 2009 at 7:20 pm
And Willy – would John McCain be doing any better of a job had he won? The man toured the country stating the economy was in good sound shape….so tell me, had he won do you really think he would be doing a better job?
March 3rd, 2009 at 7:26 pm
Willy:
You have no clue as to how his plan will work out, yet you chastise him anyway. No matter what Obama does, no matter how successful he is, you will hate him.
His stimulus package is geared to helping the poor and middle class. I’m sure you’ll disagree, but I don’t like to see people unemployed. I don’t like to see poor and homeless people worrying about where their next meal is coming from. I don’t like to see our vets forgotten by the country they fought for.
Your seem to be more concerned with making the republicans look good than what is best for the country.
You once said liberals are blinded by their hatred for Bush. Well we had good reason.
I have a challenge for you, Willy. Let’s see if you’re up to it. I challenge you to find one influential person (newscaster, pundit, radio personality, political figure, etc.) who said something similar to what the right is hoping happens during the Obama administration.
When Bush was in office for only one month, how many influential people have said things like:
“I hope Bush fails”
“I hope Bush’s policies fail”
“I hope a major city gets nuked during Bush’s adminstration”
Then come back and tell me again who is the party of hate.
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:18 pm
McCain got Obama for his election pork statements,but i wonder if McCain will get on Mitch within his own party ?
Will the real McCain stand up to his own party or blow hot air ?
March 4th, 2009 at 8:34 am
Will the real obama stand up? The entire campaign he claimed he would NOT allow earmarks, pork. Really? He claimed he would go through each bill LINE BY LINE and cut out the pork. Really?
I guess he forgot.
Nah, TDRO, you have only hoped that the war would fail and called him the worst president in history. No hate or contempt there whatsoever. But keep patting yourself on the back so you can play the victim.
March 4th, 2009 at 8:39 am
Pardon me. “too effin bad”
March 4th, 2009 at 2:09 pm
Boy, for a liberal site, Liberal Land sure gets a lot of right wingers posting here. Must be they can’t get intelligent conversation at the right wing sites.
March 4th, 2009 at 2:21 pm
Blissful:
You must have a pretty low opinion of yourself that you feel the need to inflict others with your snide, nasty remarks in an effort to make yourself feel better.
But, go right ahead. It only makes you look foolish. And almost everybody here is beginning to see you as irrelevent and unimportant and small.
March 4th, 2009 at 2:27 pm
“Will the real obama stand up? The entire campaign he claimed he would NOT allow earmarks, pork. Really? He claimed he would go through each bill LINE BY LINE and cut out the pork. Really? I guess he forgot. Nah, TDRO, you have only hoped that the war would fail and called him the worst president in history. No hate or contempt there whatsoever. But keep patting yourself on the back so you can play the victim”
Would the real conservatives please stand up!?! PLease stand up! Please stand up!
We seem to have nothing but Obama-haters and haters don’t play; haters just hate. Go hate up on a scrub and leave the boys alone with that crooked game. (That was fun!)
Did you watch his recent address to Congress? Obama said he would do just that. Go through line by line of the federal budget. He isn’t Superman, he does need time to actually do the work. Earmarks are the most misunderstood part of govt in today’s world. I am not explaining it over and over. It’s boring. We need them to used but used right; shut up about earmarks unless you want to talk about specific spending you don’t like. Because calling all earmarks bad is like saying ‘I don’t think they should spend money’.
You crazy cons always want everyone to look like nay-sayers and when you get caught with your hand in the cookie jar you just start nay-saying yourselves. Rush Limbaugh and you should get a yacht and laugh about stupid libs while drinking wine together. Because you guys are massive hypocrites who want America to fail in the name of politics. Not even a ‘dirty lib’ does that. I guess Rush Limbaugh is worse than a liberal. Oh my!
Nobody wanted the war to fail. We wanted it to not have started. A war you and yours have blood on your hands directly for. You all danced us up to the line and pushed us over the edge. Then when it all goes to poo you blame the other side for pointing it out. Too bad I can’t live in your denial world where you do no wrong and everyone who is Republican is always pure and golden while all Democrats are made of evil and rusted shut.
March 4th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
my definition of pork is wasteful spending, not all earmarks are pork. the federal government should be open to funding certain things, drinking water and wastewater systems are IMPORTANT parts of infrastructure. Bike paths are not.
and I think both of my examples were of Republican earmarks….think before you post.
—–
That’s good your objective. Not many people on both sides do that these days.
Bike paths are not as important as basic services. Of course. Do we have to go into those 3rd grade level issues? I always hope to avoid them.
Wasteful spending is what? Democratic Party spending? Because that’s what the cons are doing right now. If it’s part of Democratic policy then they reject it outright. That’s not democracy that’s dirty politics. Do you support a break down in our govt in the name of stupid political bickering?
I always think before I post (yah, right). This is so not the point. Who cares who started the ball rolling is what I say. But that’s not true on the other side. If I hide myself as a con (easily done) then I earn much respect and others just smile at me while I blast viscous right wing radio. But it’s all a lie for you guys to eat up while I laugh at you inside. When hidden in your world I discover many things. Like that when you a ‘rotten liberal’ that every idea you have is wrong and evil. Or that if you are a ‘God-fearing man’ that you will support the conservative movement in any social oppression or agenda they cook up because that’s what’s best for the nation.
Sorry to blow the whole gas-works open on you but you’d be surprised at how many people might ‘act’ like they agree with you when in fact they don’t. Or they just pretend to have an opinion on things but really it’s just an excuse to exclude others. Now not all cons are like this. Just like not all libs are whatever Limbaugh said they were today. It’s all just true in loose extents.
March 4th, 2009 at 3:37 pm
ERIC,
Wasn’t it you who was busting Joe the Plumbers ba11s for not paying his taxes? Or was that someone else?
POSTED BY JAREDFROMTEXAS
No, that must have been someone else. I don’t care about Joe’s taxes. My problem with Joe is that he doesn’t even know the meaning of words he uses. If I talked about socialism without actually knowing what it is I should be called a flaming moron as well.
Yea, that was someone else. He was wrongfully treated by the media. I don’t much like Joe but it is true that the media had no right to dig into his private matters.
Pay your taxes. Give unto Caesar and all that. But if you don’t … are you some kind of evil jerk or are you just another human being who is not perfect?
So the tax thing is silly with ALL of them out there in Washington. They shouldn’t have done that but come on … we just had a whole admin full of criminals (yes, criminals!) and now these people want to talk bad on some real people who have real life problems like owing taxes and not checking all the boxes and having the IRS come stick a finger in an uncomfortable place.
March 4th, 2009 at 3:43 pm
Eric said; we just had a whole admin full of criminals (yes, criminals!)
K: Eric, what proof do you have that points to your statment?
March 4th, 2009 at 4:00 pm
Eric said: So how do you propose to get anything done in washington without lobbyists? A magic wand? Your awesome ideology just making everyone so happy they don’t need a lobby to represent them?
K: Eric, it WAS BO’s ideology before he got elected. Now, he’s hiring lobbiests to run his administration…
March 4th, 2009 at 4:08 pm
Kregg:
Eric said; we just had a whole admin full of criminals (yes, criminals!)
K: Eric, what proof do you have that points to your statment?
We have no proof, and if the democrats remain spineless and refuse to investigate, we may never have any. Now I knw what you’re thinking, “Nothing could be worse than getting a BJ in the oval office”. We liberals beg to differ.
——————————————
K: Eric, it WAS BO’s ideology before he got elected. Now, he’s hiring lobbiests to run his administration…
Didn’t all presidents, regardless of party, promise the moon and never deliver?
March 4th, 2009 at 4:29 pm
$410 Billion Omnibus Spending Bill With Bipartisan Pork!
http://www.thedailychange.com/410-billion-omnibus-spending-bill-with-bipartisan-pork/
March 4th, 2009 at 9:51 pm
Why, Alan, we know that when Republican’s give themselves earmarks, there not called earmarks. They’re called “FREEDOMMARKS” !!! Oh, the hypocrisy!!
March 5th, 2009 at 5:21 am
Maybe I should ask my Senator for an earmark to study the brains (if any) of bloated, drug-addled, conservative talk show hosts and chronic, Republican hypocrisy. :)
March 5th, 2009 at 5:29 am
Blissful:
You must have a pretty low opinion of yourself that you feel the need to inflict others with your snide, nasty remarks in an effort to make yourself feel better.
But, go right ahead. It only makes you look foolish. And almost everybody here is beginning to see you as irrelevent and unimportant and small.
Posted by TDro319
Boy, for a liberal site, Liberal Land sure gets a lot of right wingers posting here. Must be they can’t get intelligent conversation at the right wing sites.
Posted by TDro319
Pot, Kettle, Kettle, Pot
March 5th, 2009 at 10:36 am
TDRO
I don’t go for personal attacks. My opinion and political beliefs are far different from yours. CAn you respect that or not?
Our country was not founded on the idea that we all have to be omnibots who agree with each other on everything. There are supposed to be two sides with different ideas so everything balances out.
We can get plenty of intelligent conversation on right wing sites, but a lot of conservatives are open-minded enough and willing to look at what liberals have to say, even if we disagree with it. Didn’t you vote for a guy who said he wanted to reach across the aisle and get rid of politics as usual?? Hmmmm.
March 5th, 2009 at 10:47 am
BLISSFULL
You got me wondering on this 1. Did,t vote for a guy who said he wanted to reach across the aisle and get rid of politics as usual?? Hmmmmm
It seems to me that the other side is playing politics as usual by rejecting everything Obama has tried. He has had them visit and visit them and has went beyound the realm to reach out.
Besides that, he is dealing with the GOP leader that holds no office.
GOP members that hold office,bow down to the leader that prevents anything from getting done. That no 1 in the party will stand up and tell mega mouth to shut up that we are trying to do business here in Washington.
The sadness of it all,mega mouth wants a free market,deregulation and everything that got us in the current mess and going back to that idealism will send our nation into a depression.
March 5th, 2009 at 11:07 am
Pot, Kettle, Kettle, Pot
Posted by GuidoVanHorn
Your comment makes absolutely no sense and doesn’t have anything to do with my post. Go back and read my post slowly.
March 5th, 2009 at 7:36 pm