Sunday, 11/28/10, Public Square

Advertisements

12 Comments

Filed under The Public Square

12 responses to “Sunday, 11/28/10, Public Square

  1. This (earmarks) seems to me like just another one of those diversions. From what I understand, earmarks only account for less than a percent of the budget. I can’t see where it helps to even bother with them at this point and can certainly see where it might hurt. Yesterday’s Eagle had an article that said that Kansas could lose million’s in funding if all earmarks are cut. That’s money not coming into our local economy. How does that help?

    http://www.kansas.com/2010/11/27/1606822/earmark-ban-could-kill-some-kansas.html

    This is our taxes coming back to us, working for us. Not sitting in some millionaires bank account until they feel like spending it.

  2. Zippy

    The objection to earmarks is that they normally are not a part of the formal budget process.

    But all the posturing we’ve seen from the Tea Party people is about to collide with grade-school mathematics. Whether enough people will notice–or even care–is a different question.

    P.S. Hey Moonshadow, I read and post sporadically (as usual), but I like your contributions here. Just My Opinion.

    • tosmarttobegop

      One of the misimpressions is that by stopping earmarks it will reduce the budget.
      But that money is already in the budget simply it now will be spend in other areas.
      The amount has already been decided how much to spend, so ending earmarks is nothing more the a bright and shiny object to give to the voters to distract them.

  3. Zippy

    P.S. Since the incoming Republicans are being given a manual requiring to read and know the Constitution (ahem: shouldn’t they already have done that?), I should probably mention that my compliment to Moonshadow should not be construed as to deny or disparage other compliments retained by other posters! 🙂

  4. tosmarttobegop

    I took advantage of the gusty winds and did 8 loads of laundry and hung them out.

    Amazingly all stayed on the line, I thought there was the possibility of having to pick up clothes from the neighbor’s yard the way the wind blew.

    • indypendent

      I have to give you credit for accomplishing such a tricky task. My backyard is so full of leaves, I don’t know if my clothes would be dirtier after I hung them out to dry than when I put them out?

  5. indypendent

    I see earmarks as a way for our taxes to return to us – that is true. But I also see earmarks as a way for the most politically connected Congress critters to get their cake and eat it too.

    I see the current crop of Republicans who ran on cutting out all massive federal spending actually not care so long as they are the ones who are bringing home those earmarks for the ‘right’ people.

    And that smacks of hypocrisy.

    Besides – I don’t like the fact that some taxpaying states have to carry the burden for those states that receive more in federal money than they sendf in.

    Rather than earmarks, let’s just lower the federal taxes and push everything onto the state taxes. That way – each state will have to be responsible for their own roads, bridges, transportation, etc. That would certainly cut down all those freeloading states that the rest of us have to carry because they don’t come anywhere near sending in enough of their own money.

    I’m tired of paying for the Southern Republican states and Alaska. I’m all for telling them to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps – you betcha!

  6. indypendent

    Dare I even ask – did anyone venture out to Andover Dillons today? I read the coverage on one of the local television network’s website where it stated Palin requested no media coverage (color me shocked) but that they would be in the parking lot to bring any breaking news.

    Why do we continue to create Frankenstein monsters when we know they just never go away?

  7. indypendent

    Of course, those loyal supporters were on the Opinion Line defending her gaffe at saying we must stand with our North Korean allies.

    Supporters like that deserve exactly what they get.

  8. prairie pond

    “That would certainly cut down all those freeloading states that the rest of us have to carry because they don’t come anywhere near sending in enough of their own money.”

    I guess you already know that Kansas is one of those “welfare states” that gets more money from the federal government than we pay in. I think it’s in the neighborhood of $1.30 back for every $1 paid in?

    Good republican state that we are, we hate the feds. Until we need their money…

    • indypendent

      I was not aware that Kansas is on that list – but it does not surprise me.

      As for Republicans needing the feds’ money – it is not a matter of needing the money – I suspect is more of just plain wanting that money and expecting it because they are, after all, the only ‘real’ Americans.