The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

Not At My Table - Political Discussions => National & International Politics => Topic started by: Gaspar on December 08, 2010, 09:25:35 AM

Title: Lets Talk Earmarks Again!
Post by: Gaspar on December 08, 2010, 09:25:35 AM
Yes, everyone understands that these are a small % of spending, however they represent a symptom of the syndrome.  The reports are now out and there are 39,000 new earmarks for 2011.  Almost all by Democrats, but there are some very bad Republicans too.  Total price tag $130 Billion in new spending.

Oklahoma:
435 Million, all requested by Dan Boren (121 individual requests).  None by any of our other representatives.
623 Million, by our Senator "I likes me some earmarks" Inhofe.

This is fun, click on a state, then on a district.  http://endingspending.com/map-2011/

North Dakota is the absolute worst!  They want almost 4 Billion!

The list of hilarious projects is currently being compiled.

;)

Title: Re: Lets Talk Earmarks Again!
Post by: Conan71 on December 08, 2010, 09:53:40 AM
Quote from: Gaspar on December 08, 2010, 09:25:35 AM
Yes, everyone understands that these are a small % of spending, however they represent a symptom of the syndrome.  The reports are now out and there are 39,000 new earmarks for 2011.  Almost all by Democrats, but there are some very bad Republicans too.  Total price tag $130 Billion in new spending.

Oklahoma:
435 Million, all requested by Dan Boren (121 individual requests).  None by any of our other representatives.
623 Million, by our Senator "I likes me some earmarks" Inhofe.

This is fun, click on a state, then on a district.  http://endingspending.com/map-2011/

North Dakota is the absolute worst!  They want almost 4 Billion!

The list of hilarious projects is currently being compiled.

;)



$130 bln is about 10% of discretionary spending is it not?  That's what I would consider significant.  But I forget, deficits don't matter anyhow.  Neither does the national debt.  I wonder if my creditors would accept that line of crap from me?
Title: Re: Lets Talk Earmarks Again!
Post by: Gaspar on December 08, 2010, 09:54:35 AM
Quote from: Conan71 on December 08, 2010, 09:53:40 AM
$130 bln is about 10% of discretionary spending is it not?  That's what I would consider significant.  But I forget, deficits don't matter anyhow.  Neither does the national debt.  I wonder if my creditors would accept that line of crap from me?

As long as you drive a nice car.
Title: Re: Lets Talk Earmarks Again!
Post by: Townsend on December 08, 2010, 09:56:29 AM
Now remember who you're talking about gentlemen.

You don't have to be a genius to be elected to these offices...just financed.
Title: Re: Lets Talk Earmarks Again!
Post by: we vs us on December 08, 2010, 09:59:59 AM
Quote from: Conan71 on December 08, 2010, 09:53:40 AM
I wonder if my creditors would accept that line of crap from me?

Do you issue the world's reserve currency?  No?  Then probably not. 
Title: Re: Lets Talk Earmarks Again!
Post by: Gaspar on December 08, 2010, 10:04:02 AM
Quote from: we vs us on December 08, 2010, 09:59:59 AM
Do you issue the world's reserve currency?  No?  Then probably not. 

Actually the "Conan" (hand written currency on post-it notes) may soon overcome the dollar.
Title: Re: Lets Talk Earmarks Again!
Post by: nathanm on December 08, 2010, 10:21:42 AM
Quote from: we vs us on December 08, 2010, 09:59:59 AM
Do you issue the world's reserve currency?  No?  Then probably not. 
+1
Title: Re: Lets Talk Earmarks Again!
Post by: Vision 2025 on December 08, 2010, 05:00:05 PM
That site is interesting but very misleading. 

Look at North Dakota (since they knock it so hard) and you'll find that many of the marks listed are duplicates.  Why?  Because when you click for more information link the sponsors are listed and this site comples all marks seperately they list each members marks  even if they submit a mark for the same item/amount (which often happens) so it makes it look worse.