Applesauce » Laugh along at the end of this, if you’d like

Laugh along at the end of this, if you’d like

September 9th, 2008 at 03:01pm Pat Cunningham

[kml_flashembed movie="http://www.youtube.com/v/OfLDjmKfigw" width="425" height="350" wmode="transparent" /]

14 Comments Add your own

1. Optimistic1 | September 9th, 2008 at 4:15 pm

I am laughing harder at your side blowing the door wide open on the subject of pork:

Pork in the Presidential Race
Posted on August 28, 2008 by Alexa Moutevelis

Citizens Against Government Waste
CCAGW’s 2007 Congressional Ratings came out yesterday and you may be wondering how the presidential nominees did.

• Sen. Barack Obama’s (D-Ill.) 2007 rating was 10 percent, making his lifetime score 18 percent. The 2008 Congressional Pig Book contained 53 earmarks worth $97.4 million for Sen. Obama, including $1,648,850 for the Shedd Aquarium.

• Sen. Joe Biden (D-Del.) received the worst possible rating in 2007 with 0 percent, while his lifetime rating is 22 percent. According to the Pig Book, Sen. Biden had 70 earmarks for a total of $119.7 million in fiscal year 2008, including $246,100 for the Grand Opera House in Wilmington.

• Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) received a score of 100* percent and has a lifetime rating of 88, has never requested nor received a single earmark, and has pledged to veto any spending bill that contains any earmarks.

*Sen. McCain was only present for 11 of the 35 Senate votes that CCAGW tallied. Therefore, he was not eligible for the Taxpayer Super Hero Award
2. Billybeermonicagar | September 9th, 2008 at 5:20 pm

Crickets anyone?
3. snuss | September 9th, 2008 at 6:34 pm

The 2007 Club for Growth RePORK Card

Club for Growth Releases 2007 RePORK Card

Washington - Even though the Democratic majority vowed to return Congress to a path of fiscal responsibility, the 2008 appropriations bills were stuffed with wasteful pork projects. While Representatives John Campbell, Jeff Flake, Jeb Hensarling, Scott Garrett, and David Obey (1 amendment) offered 50 amendments to strip outrageous pork projects from the appropriations bills, only one amendment, offered by Rep. Jeff Flake, passed.

The Club for Growth has compiled a RePORK Card of all members’ votes on all 50 anti-pork amendments (see below). “Taxpayers have a right to know which congressmen stand up for them and which stand up for the special interests,” said Club for Growth President Pat Toomey. “Unfortunately, the Club for Growth RePORK Card shows that most congressmen care more about lining their buddies’ pockets than they care about protecting American taxpayers.”

Some interesting numbers to consider:

* Sixteen congressmen scored a perfect 100%, voting for all 50 anti-pork amendments. They are all Republicans.
* The average Republican score was 43%. The average Democratic score was 2%.
* The average score for appropriators was 4%. The average score for non-appropriators was 25%.
* Kudos to Rep. Jim Cooper (D-TN) who scored an admirable 98%-the only Democrat to score above 20%.
* Rep. David Obey (D-WI) did not vote for his own amendment to strike all earmarks in the Labor-HHS appropriations bill. Rep. Obey scored an embarrassing 0% overall.
* 105 congressmen scored an embarrassing 0%, voting against every single amendment. The Pork Hall of Shame includes 81 Democrats and 24 Republicans.
* The Democratic Freshmen scored an abysmal average score of 2%. Their Republican counterparts scored an average score of 78%.
Source: http://www.clubforgrowth.org/2007/08/the_2007_club_for_growth_repor.php
4. snuss | September 9th, 2008 at 6:47 pm

Watch this video, as Rep. John Campbell questions John Murtha on an Democratic earmark. UNBELIEVABLE!

http://www.clubforgrowth.org/2007/08/a_pork_project_showdown.php

This is the recap: Tuesday, August 07, 2007
You want the truth…
Posted by: John Campbell at 6:36 PM
Early in the morning on Sunday, as we were finishing up amendments on the Defense Appropriations bill, I debated an earmark challenge with the Chairman of the Defense Subcommittee on Appropriations, Congressman John Murtha (D-PA). The earmark allocated $2 million to Sherwin-Williams Paint Company to develop what they described as a “paint shield to protect against microbial attacks.” As the sponsor of the amendment, Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs-Jones (D-OH) did not come down to defend her earmark. The defense was left to Congressman Murtha.

Here is a link to this brief debate, now keep in mind all I wanted to know was:

1) Is this project requested by the Department of Defense? The correct answer is NO.

2) Is this a project that was competitively bid among other potential suppliers? The correct answer again is NO.

3) Will the taxpayer own the rights to any successful product developed? Again, the correct answer, according to Sherwin-Williams’ own brochure for this project is NO.

4) How do we know that this particular company is the best supplier? There are many great paint companies in America, how do we know that Sherwin-Williams is the right company to do this job? Answer never given.

5) What investigations have they done to ensure that this is the right price? Is $2 million just an arbitrary amount? Answer never given.

For those of us in Congress fighting to reform our earmark process, this video is a good example of where we need to start.

Source: http://greeneyeshade.townhall.com/blog/g/69cf29f0-bf52-439d-80a9-5570db4559fd

Well, Pat, are you still laughing?
5. Veritas | September 9th, 2008 at 7:00 pm

Interesting polling development:

“The latest Gallup Poll Daily tracking update finds John McCain maintaining his five-point lead versus Barack Obama among registered voters, 49% to 44%. McCain led Obama by five percentage points in Monday’s report on the strength of a six-point increase in the percentage of voters choosing him on the presidential trial heat following the Republican National Convention.”

“While the increased vote share a candidate receives following his convention usually diminishes, candidates who lead after the second convention usually remain the leader a month after the convention. This is based on a review of historical Gallup data since 1964 — the first year for which Gallup could reliably measure convention bounces…Thus, if Obama regains the lead over the next month, he will be bucking the historical trend.”

http://www.gallup.com/poll/110143/Gallup-Daily-McCain-Maintains-5Point-Lead.aspx
6. Peter Gunn | September 9th, 2008 at 7:03 pm

Yawn

I’m getting Sleepy

Must be all that hot air that’s been blowing around here.
7. snuss | September 9th, 2008 at 7:11 pm

Those closest to the source, feel it the most.
8. Pat Cunningham | September 9th, 2008 at 7:15 pm

Veritas: Here’s an even MORE interesting polling development, made public just this evening. The latest Wall Street Journal/NBC poll has Obama leading McCain by one point. That’s a modest margin, but it counters the daily tracking poll you’ve cited. The story with the WSJ/NBC poll also has this passage:

“The survey had good news for Sen. Obama as well, showing that he improved his standing with the electorate in areas where he had been seen as weak. More voters found said they were comfortable with him as president than they did in a Journal poll three weeks ago, as did the portion who said they were confident in his ability to be commander in chief.

“A growing number also said he has a background and set of values they can identify with.

“And despite the McCain-Palin bounce, Democratic pollster Peter Hart — who conducts the poll with Republican Neil Newhouse — offered a caution for the Republicans. He noted that voters are just getting to know Gov. Palin: ‘The faster they rise, the steeper the descent.’”
9. Pat Cunningham | September 9th, 2008 at 7:19 pm

snuss: You ask if I’m still laughing. The answer is yes, I’m laughing more than ever at your apparent belief that the long story you tell in Comment No. 4 has anything whatever to do with Sarah Palin’s and John McCain’s lies about her earmarks. Pretty lame, snuss. Pretty lame.
10. SNuss | September 10th, 2008 at 7:22 am

‘The faster they rise, the steeper the descent.’”

Sounds like Obama’s current condition.
11. Milton Waddams | September 10th, 2008 at 8:37 am

And you say we’re biased? From the Club for Growth website:

“The primary tactic of the separate Club for Growth PAC is to provide financial support from Club members to viable pro-growth candidates to Congress, particularly in Republican primaries.”

I am sure that they are completely unbiased in what they consider pork vs. chicken. Repubs NEVER distort things the facts for political gain….right?
12. snuss | September 10th, 2008 at 10:50 am

Care to challenge the statistics of the voting? Facts are facts, but Liberal opinions are, well, applesauce.
13. Optimistic1 | September 10th, 2008 at 11:19 am

How about “Citizens Against Government Waste” Milton? Can you come up with a more non-biased source to support your opinion?
14. Veritas | September 10th, 2008 at 3:17 pm

One more polling update as of today: McCain still ahead.

“The latest Gallup Poll Daily tracking update finds John McCain continuing to lead Barack Obama, 48% to 43% among registered voters. The Sept. 7-9 average — spanning interviewing conducted Sunday, Monday, and Tuesday — finds little substantive change in the shape of the race compared to earlier this week, although each of the two candidate’s level of support has dropped a point compared to the Tuesday’s reported average.”

http://www.gallup.com/poll/110212/Gallup-Daily-McCain-48-Obama-43.aspx