McCain's Earmark Lie

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-15-2008
McCain's Earmark Lie
175
Mon, 09-15-2008 - 9:19pm
The full story:


Daily Kos

McCain's Earmark Lie: Palin actually grubs $1 mil/day as Gov. by Kagro X

Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 03:00:11 PM PDT

The Wall Street Journal:




Last week, Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain said his running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, hadn't sought earmarks or special-interest spending from Congress, presenting her as a fiscal conservative. But state records show Gov. Palin has asked U.S. taxpayers to fund $453 million in specific Alaska projects over the past two years.



It's been 652 days since Earmark Queen Sarah Palin took office as Governor of Alaska.



In that time, she's hustled for $453,000,000 in federal lipstick pork.



That's $694,785.28 a day. Six hundred ninetey-four thousand, seven hundred and eight five dollars and twenty-eight cents. Every day. Even Sundays!



Palin was grubbing six hundred ninetey-four thousand, seven hundred and eight five dollars and twenty-eight cents out of the federal trough on the very day when John McCain looked America in the eye and said she was taking zero.



And she took it again today, too.



And she took it on every one of the 312 nights she spent at home and billed the Alaskan taxpayers for it.



So why say it's a million dollars a day? Well, first, let me show you what Slick Sarah Palin is telling people:




On the campaign trail, Gov. Palin has repeatedly attacked Sen. Obama on earmarks. "Our opponent has requested nearly one billion dollars in earmarks in three years. That's about a million for every working day," she said at a rally in Albuquerque, N.M.



Ohhhh, this feels like it's going to get embarrassing in a second....



And, behold! Look what "The Math" says!



It is difficult to compare Sen. Obama's earmark record with Gov. Palin's -- their states differ in size, for instance, and the two candidates play different roles in the process. But using the same calculation that the McCain campaign uses, the total amount of earmarked dollars divided by the number of working days while each held office (assuming a five-day workweek, every week, for both), Gov. Palin sought $980,000 per workday, compared with roughly $893,000 for Sen. Obama.



Not only is Palin taking much more, but oh my word if the million dollar figure doesn't actually fit her sooooo much better than the person she's trying to use it against! What a surprise!



So that's almost a million dollars a day, whether she showed up at the office or not. A million bucks, plus $60 in her pocket for defrosting one of her own mooseburgers for lunch.



And really, Palin must be asking herself, why not chisel the Alaska state government a little bit? After all:




The state's earmark requests stand out in part because its state government is among the wealthiest in the U.S. Flush with oil and gas royalties, it doesn't impose income or sales taxes. In fact, money flows the other way: Every man, woman and child this year got a check for $3,200.



Gosh, but they're such rugged individualists up there! They're gonna launch themselves into orbit with those bootstraps, don'tcha know?



A million dollars a day. From you and me. Plus $3,200 in the bank for each one of 'em. And $60 in Sarah's pocket for every lunch at home. (Like every working mom, of course!)



It's the new fiscal responsibility, in John McCain's seven house-owning, $5 million middle class living world!





But for the present age, which prefers the sign to the thing signified, the copy to the original, representation to reality, appearance to essence.....truth is considered profane, and only illusion sacred. Sacredness

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-08-2003
Tue, 09-23-2008 - 12:54am
Thank you for the advise. I had already decided to ignore his posts. I got bored with the narcissus!

 Rose

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-16-2007
Tue, 09-23-2008 - 1:01am

Oh no, Rose, you read my statement wrong!


I was only saying, that if I had to CHOOSE (not vote) for either Obama or McCain, I would choose McCain, only because his General platform aligns more with my philosophies regarding small government.


Personally, I would never vote for a candidate based on abortion, or a lot of the other social issues.

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-19-2008
Tue, 09-23-2008 - 1:27am

Sorry...couldn't resist... ; )

*** How can any woman support a man who has said he doesn't believe in equal pay?

"We have not done enough. And I'm committed to making sure that there's equal pay for equal work. That there is equal opportunity in every aspect of our society. And that is my record and you can count on it."
--John McCain, Town Hall meeting, Hudson, WI, July 11, 2008.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/07/mccain_on_equal_pay.html

*** Why would you support a man who helped create our economic downfall?

John McCain recognized the problem three years ago and put a reform bill before Congress. Obama said he recognized the problem and did nothing.

*** Why vote for a man who's so out of touch, he stated our economy was fine, the same day it was collapsing? Now, that's scary! Even Bush said we were in trouble!

He said the "foundations of our economy are strong"...and they are. Productivity is high, inflation is low, and generally speaking, the market is strong.

*** Unless you are very wealthy, why support a man who has voted with Bush over 90% of the time.

Obama voted with Bush almost 50% of the time...and 97% of the time right along Party lines. Why would you want a party lapdog for President?

*** Why vote for a man who, despite his stating just the opposite, is in very deep with lobbyists. As chairman of the appropriations committee, large amounts of money were given to the special interests of the lobbyists he spent a lot of time with?

Isn't Biden's son a lobbyist? Obama's campaign is rife with lobbyists. Obama received the second highest amount from Fannie Mae. Obama earmarked millions for the hospital his wife worked for and for other projects involving campaign contributers. Ethical? Hmmm...

*** Why vote for a man who has sided with big business over workers, every time?

First, it's a lie, but it shows character and experience NOT to demonize business as a "boogey man" and realize that when business works, the employees benefit.

*** Why vote for a man who would make the tax breaks for the ultra- wealthy permanent, when we are so far in debt?

Obama flip flopped on the issue and supported McCain on this issue, realizing that raising taxes would HURT the economy. So much for Barry's judgment.

*** Why vote for a man who now says water-boarding isn't torture, even though he has said it was torture when it was done to him?

Despite the claims of some partisans, McCain's decision was not a flip-flop, but rather the continuation of a position he took in 2005 when he first championed a bill to restrict the Bush Administration's ability to mistreat detainees.

"The field manual, a public document written for military use, is not always directly translatable to use by intelligence officers," McCain explained in February, reiterating his position from 2005. He added that the CIA should be allowed to use "alternative interrogation techniques," that are not otherwise outlawed as unduly coercive, cruel, inhumane or degrading. McCain has not publicly described the techniques that he believes fall into that category.

McCain senior adviser Mark Salter said the candidate continues to monitor whether the techniques employed by the CIA officials pass legal muster. "If McCain has reason to believe that they have crossed the line, he will litigate that," Salter said, explaining that the Senator might discuss these concerns publicly or privately. "McCain communicates his view directly to the people doing it," Salter added, in reference to interrogation procedures.

McCain publicly introduced his bill, which was later called the Detainee Treatment Act, he had narrowed the scope to require the field manual's use only for the military interrogations or interrogations on military property. But the McCain proposal did also make clear all U.S. Government agencies were banned from employing "cruel, inhuman or degrading" treatment of prisoners, as described by the U.S. Constitution and an international convention against torture, for which the United States is a signatory. A year later, McCain supported another bill, called the Military Commissions Act, which again made it a clear criminal act to employ "cruel or inhuman" treatment, as described by the Geneva Conventions."""
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1729891,00.html

*** Why vote for two people who are anxious to involve us in at least one more wars?

Obama wants to redeploy our troops to Afghanistan and invade Pakistan. And while the effete elitist would likely cower and appease an aggressive Iran, he "says" he's not taking military options "off the table."

*** Why vote for a man with a known anger management problem? Who thinks he is always right, and gets very angry with anyone who disagrees? Haven't we had enough of s president like that?!

There's no evidence to support your allegations...there is, however, a LOT of evidence that Obama has an incredibly thin skin. Having a school-girl's sensitivity is not a quality we really want in a President.

*** Why vote for two people who are so out of touch with the middle-income people?

You mean Palin, who IS middle class? LOL! Or are you talking about the millionaire, elitist, Harvard educated Senator with the BIG house who's "in touch" with middle income people? ; )

*** I'm not going to ask anything directly about Palin, as I believe I know your feelings on her. Although I don't understand why she doesn't scare you!

What's "scary" about a woman with conservative morals and values who's worked her way up from the PTS to City Council to Mayor to Governor running for VP? You think Hillary is qualified and she's never run anything...all she had to do was sleep with a former President. Pretty scary.

*** Why vote for a man who's campaign has mostly consisted of telling lies about Obama? I know Obama started fighting back, but he has not told outright lies about McCain, like McCain has about him?

Obama's entire campaign is one big lie...both about his experience and accomplishments and smearing McCain. So much for a "new kind of politics."

*** Why vote for two people who have been caught in lie after lie? I want to hear the truth, not lies, so I'll vote for them!

Then I guess you won't be voting for Obama/Biden...liars all.

*** Republicans bring out the abortion issue during every election!

Actually, it was the Libs who are panicking over their right to kill their children. It isn't even on the radar of the McCain campaign.

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-19-2008
Tue, 09-23-2008 - 1:58am
Go Obama!! Go back home and be a community organizer. McCain's got a country to run and he needs good people at the grass roots level.
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-16-2007
Tue, 09-23-2008 - 2:00am
The liberals are crazy....Not even a bad way, for some of them...My cousin who is a flaming tree-hugging socialist liberal realized the other day, "Wow, I went so far in that direction, I think I'm a libertartian!
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-19-2008
Tue, 09-23-2008 - 2:11am
.
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-08-2003
Tue, 09-23-2008 - 2:13am
Too bad McCain isn't in any way ready

 Rose

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-08-2003
Tue, 09-23-2008 - 2:15am
LOL, so much for having an honest, unbiased

 Rose

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-16-2007
Tue, 09-23-2008 - 2:20am

OK, Rose, but Obama is also, like, kinda insane.


I mean, Obama SCARES me.

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-16-2007
Tue, 09-23-2008 - 3:01am
I think it's sad that you took my post to mean that I was not having an unbiased discussion.

Pages