Comments on: Documents Prove Again That Sarah Palin Was an Earmark Queen

By: Bruce Henry

Bruce Henry — Sat, 20 Sep 2008 10:31:04 +0000

I’m going to rob a convenience store. It’s been robbed before. If I get caught, I’m going to use this defense: “The last guy who robbed this store got more money than I did.”

By: C.S.Strowbridge

C.S.Strowbridge — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 16:23:34 +0000

“So nobody will answer the question.
Just as I thought.
Thanks!”

Her state gets more per capita than any other state, yet you think she’s showing restraint by not requesting as much as the previous guy did.

You are so fucking pathetic.

By: Duros Hussein62

Duros Hussein62 — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 02:53:43 +0000

Tell us, Mr. Tea. What is the name of this obscure hospital? Is this the first time they have been in line for federal money? How did that $1 million earmark turn out? Did the hospital receive the money? And when “said Senator’s wife” received a raise in pay, did her job duties change? How does her salary compare with others doing the same job?

There goes Mr. Basement, asking questions he already knows the answers to again.

TFJ, Q.

By: ed

ed — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 02:01:06 +0000

So nobody will answer the question.
Just as I thought.

Operation Obliterate Strawman is a success! Mission accomplished!

By: Quaker in a Basement

Quaker in a Basement — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 00:16:58 +0000

So nobody will answer the question.

Just as I thought.

Care for an explanation? Nobody will answer your question because it’s an irrelevant question. Let’s give her the benefit of every doubt and say she asked for only a third as much money as Murkowski.

Now what?

By: fafaroo

fafaroo — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 00:15:49 +0000

“So nobody will answer the question. Just as I thought.”

And we’re not surprised you won’t admit that the question is utterly beside the point. I guess that makes us even.

By: Bruce Henry

Bruce Henry — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 00:07:15 +0000

Because the answer to the question is, “OK, maybe she’s 50 percent, ( or 40 percent, or 85 percent, or 10 percent), less corrupt than her predecessor. Still corrupt, just LESS corrupt.”
Don’t expect an intelligent answer to a stupid question.

By: Quaker in a Basement

Quaker in a Basement — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 00:06:09 +0000

Ho hum. Another day, another chance to straighten out Mr. Tea’s confusion over basic facts.

Such as, say, a certain Senator designating $1 million to a certain hospital that just more than doubled said Senator’s wife’s salary.

I won’t wait up, Mr. Tea. (However, I do congratulate you on taking the trouble to actually find out what an “earmark” is. Well done!)

By: Jay

Jay — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 23:55:36 +0000

So nobody will answer the question.

Just as I thought.

Thanks!

By: fafaroo

fafaroo — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 23:37:57 +0000

“Here’s a hint for folks: mayors are not members of Congress. They can request funding …”

Once again Jay Tea rushes straight past the point in his haste to display his knowledge of the patently obvious.

According to Jay Tea’s logic Palin can explain her and McCain’s blatant lies by arguing that, well, she was only requesting millions of dollars in earmarks. It’s not her fault if Congress actually gave her what she requested.

By: Oliver Willis

Oliver Willis — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 23:24:15 +0000

Sarah Palin keeps saying she was against earmarks. She supposedly hates them as much as John McCain supposedly does. And yet, there she is, making earmarks. It's like Gary Hart pledging fidelity and telling the media to check him out. And then they did.

By: Jay Tea

Jay Tea — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 23:19:47 +0000

There’s a difference between routine requests for federal funding and earmarks. The federal Office of Management and Budget defines earmarks as funds provided by the Congress for projects or programs where the congressional direction (in bill or report language) circumvents Executive Branch merit-based or competitive allocation processes, or specifies the location or recipient, or otherwise curtails the ability of the Executive Branch to manage critical aspects of the funds allocation process.

Here’s a hint for folks: mayors are not members of Congress. They can request funding, they can even request that their member of Congress set it up as an earmark, but only a member of Congress can designate an earmark.

Such as, say, a certain Senator designating $1 million to a certain hospital that just more than doubled said Senator’s wife’s salary. Or, say, another certain Senator making sure that several million dollars goes to the clients of his lobbyist son.

By: fafaroo

fafaroo — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 23:13:05 +0000

“A direct comparison.”

Of course it isn’t, because the issue isn’t how much Palin requested in earmarks compared to her predecessor, it’s why she and John McCain have blatantly lied about her record in order to present an image of her as a foe of earmarks, period.

John McCain said point blank on the view that Palin requested ZERO earmarks while she was governor of Alaska. That’s clearly not true.

As a recognized non-partisan foe of hypocrisy wherever you see it, Jay, what do have to say about McCain’s statement?

By: Quaker in a Basement

Quaker in a Basement — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 23:10:20 +0000

Hint: I haven’t heard anyone say: Spent less than Murkowski!

By: Quaker in a Basement

Quaker in a Basement — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 23:09:38 +0000

Here’s another easy question to answer, Jay: What is Ms. Palin telling voters about why they should vote for her?

By: Jay

Jay — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 23:05:26 +0000

And I am only talking about Murkowski’s last to years in office. A direct comparison.

By: Jay

Jay — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 23:03:53 +0000

Simple question Oliver. How much did Palin request in earmarks in her nearly 2 years as Governor as opposed to her predecessor? What are the numbers?

That’s an easy question to answer.

By: dk

dk — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 22:59:14 +0000

Fundamentals are hard to keep track of.

Like houses.

http://diy.despair.com/output/poster45929222.jpg

By: jr

jr — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 22:10:08 +0000

“small town values!”-Clear Channelites