I've got a couple of free moments on hand, and at the same time I saw this (via Glenn Reynolds):
Bloggers, too have latched onto this theme. A coalition of bloggers have launched a website called “porkbusters.” The site lists every member of the House and Senate by the name and has a column next to the name for “committed cuts,” or sacrifices. Currently, the only member of Congress listed with a “committed cut” is House Minority Leader, Nancy Pelosi (D-CA).
Many Republican members of Congress must be asking themselves, “Is Nancy Pelosi the best fiscal conservative this Congress has to offer?”
This is the sort of departure between what politicians say and what they do that's one of the many things that had me leave the Republican party in the first place. Conservative politicians say they're about fiscal responsibility, but in reality they're just a different face of the political animal that buys votes using taxpayer dollars. It's an addiction of sorts, methinks. Kudos to Pelosi for at least making the pledge, for whatever reasons.
I looked at the portions of the highway bill that are going to Florida, and I know there's at least ten million dollars that don't belong there, without even looking into what each line item actually means. It's likely that the inappropriate appropriations (heh) are actually several times that. I think the state got over half a billion, so I wouldn't be a bit surprised if we got into nine-digit amounts of pork.
I'm still sick, and I'm still working my ass off when I'm not sleeping, but this was one of those funny-tragic things that I thought needed to be underlined, highlighted, and raised to a larger, bolded font.
Consider this an open thread.
Update:
You know, the "waste, fraud, and abuse" that goes on with government spending is really something that can't be eliminated in a democracy. You can try to keep it down, you can hope for a divided government so that when trying to screw each other both parties cut spending, but to think that any Congress will voluntarily quit that sort of horse trading is a pipe dream.
Taxes need to go up, and to say otherwise is to simply engage in wishful thinking.
Posted by: Andrew Reeves | September 22, 2005 at 09:39 AM
"[...]but to think that any Congress will voluntarily quit that sort of horse trading is a pipe dream.
Taxes need to go up, and to say otherwise is to simply engage in wishful thinking."
Well that's just defeatist, as well as being a terrible reason for taxes to go up. Not that I wouldn't be willing to pay higher taxes for any number of well run government services, but to fund pork - because it's what government always does - is certainly not one of those reasons.
I do believe that government - when transparent - can efficiently serve the public good. What we have now is neither transparent, nor does it serve any public good. Our federal government is a mess of self serving institutions and politicians. Unfortunately, I have no idea how to fix this mess. --M
Posted by: J. Maynard Gelinas | September 22, 2005 at 10:27 AM
I'm still waiting for this part to go into effect.
Posted by: Slartibartfast | September 22, 2005 at 11:07 AM
Should have read "Conservative politicians say...", but I'm sure that some will maintain the original was true. I'm going to edit the post, and leave this here as a keeping-the-author-honest kind of thing.
Posted by: Slartibartfast | September 22, 2005 at 11:32 AM
Re: Update. If I ever have an "office conversation" like that, I have left a living will instructing that I be actively euthanized via fourth-story defenestration.
Posted by: norbizness | September 22, 2005 at 11:37 AM
What we're learning is that the only party in favor of fiscal responsibility is the party out of power.
Despite Nick Danger's* suggestions to the contrary, however, that is not a license to spend like drunken sailors.
*I want a Matinee B-Movie Action Hero- sounding name too! How about Edward Courageous! Or (more noire) Edward Calamity?
Posted by: Edward_ | September 22, 2005 at 11:41 AM
I'm wondering if this is true enough to be considered axiomatic. If only there were a "no trump" version of politics...
Posted by: Slartibartfast | September 22, 2005 at 11:45 AM
"I want a Matinee B-Movie Action Hero- sounding name too! How about Edward Courageous! Or (more noire) Edward Calamity?"
While not wanting to rain on your thoughts of changing your name to something more heroic than Underscore, I assumed he took his handle from the Firesign Theatre detective character:
"Hello, I'd like a pizza to go, with no anchovies.
Sorry, Mac, I spell my name Danger!"
Posted by: Dantheman | September 22, 2005 at 11:48 AM
You could ride the coattails of this guy:
You could adopt the handle 'Longshanks', I guess. The alternative (thoughtfully left unbolded in the above excerpt) might be humorous, but it's a little...unwieldy.
Posted by: Slartibartfast | September 22, 2005 at 11:53 AM
Edward, here's a handy reference.
"No!! Put down that pickle!"
Posted by: ral | September 22, 2005 at 11:59 AM
According to chroniclers, Edward requested that his bones should be carried on Scottish campaigns and that his heart be taken to the Holy Land. However, Edward was buried at Westminster Abbey in a plain black marble tomb, which in later years was painted with the words Scottorum malleus (Hammer of the Scots) and Pactum serva (Keep troth).
For the record: despite the romanticism of having my bones go to Bavaria and my heart to Istanbul, all body parts, lance included, are to be scattered near some body of water...preferably fresh water [i.e., no whales nearby]
Posted by: Edward_ | September 22, 2005 at 12:04 PM
Edward Rococo works for me.
Posted by: Tim | September 22, 2005 at 12:06 PM
Thanks ral.
Edward Ro-co-co...puh-leaze. Edward Baroque, OK, but...we have aesthetic standards, thank you.
Posted by: Edward_ | September 22, 2005 at 12:12 PM
Edward Scotshammer. Or even better, Edward Scotchhammer.
Which reads a bit better than Edward Bestlanceinalltheworld, I guess.
Posted by: Slartibartfast | September 22, 2005 at 12:17 PM
Some fuel for the fire.
New Scientist: Flood walls in New Orleans were ‘structurally flawed’
Posted by: Jack Lecou | September 22, 2005 at 12:18 PM
I'd seen that in the MSM, Jack, but it's too soon to say what happened, there. Evidently this is not the sort of barrier that the Army COE recommends in this environment, so there's a puzzler.
More here.
Posted by: Slartibartfast | September 22, 2005 at 12:27 PM
Edward Scotchhammer
Edward Scotchslammer, perhaps...although your last option is certainly worth the reading inconvenience.
Posted by: Edward_ | September 22, 2005 at 12:28 PM
"What we're learning is that the only party in favor of fiscal responsibility is the party out of power."
It doesn't have to be that way. Case in point, the Liberal Party of Canada has been in power for over a decade now and has been very fiscally responsible running small to medium surpluses for 8 years now.
(Yes, you can argue as the Torys loudly do, that they could do better. But the fact remains).
Posted by: Yukoner | September 22, 2005 at 12:28 PM
Edward - A few ideas from your fan base:
Edward Torment*
Edward Tension*
Edward Menace
Edward Battle
Edward Fury*
Edward Ambush
Edward Omen*
Edward Venture
Edward Feral
Edward Deadfall*
Edward Obscene
Edward Savage (Nah, too close to Michael)
Edward Vicious
Edward Brutal
Edward Hotpants (not so much "noir")
* My favorites...YMMV.
Posted by: xanax | September 22, 2005 at 01:36 PM
How 'bout Grateful Ed?
Posted by: Jeremy Osner | September 22, 2005 at 02:08 PM
It is my considered opinion that fiscal disapline is only available from the party or idealogy willing to pay for spending with taxes.
I think Republicans have shown that once the relationship between levels of taxation and levels of spending is taken away spending becomes a free lunch and, as Cheney so famously said, 'Reagan proved deficits don't matter' becomes a political creed.
Taxes are the only guage we have if spending is worthwhile or not. Taxes limit pork, taxes limit adventuous foreign wars, taxes limit boondoggle missions to Mars.
Posted by: ken | September 22, 2005 at 02:11 PM
I should have added that a liberal philosophy of tax and spend is therefore far more fiscally responsible than its alternative conservative philosophy of cut taxes, borrow and spend.
Posted by: ken | September 22, 2005 at 02:24 PM
awesome xanax!
top three
Edward Fury*
Edward Ambush (love the rhythm of it)
Edward Venture
'bout Grateful Ed?
Would my groupies then be EdHeads?
Nah...might was well be Mr. Ed at that point.
Posted by: Edward_ | September 22, 2005 at 02:46 PM
Edward Drawde. Easy to remember.
Posted by: Tim | September 22, 2005 at 03:14 PM
but how is it pronounced?
Posted by: Edward_ | September 22, 2005 at 03:21 PM
Edward Stiletto
Edward Fisticuffs
Edward Dagger
Edward Roundhouse
Edward Shortsword
Edward Neckbreaker
Edward Scissorhands
Posted by: cleek | September 22, 2005 at 04:39 PM
I don't know about you cleek, but if I were Edward I'd much prefer Longsword than Shortsword...if you know what I mean.
Posted by: xanax | September 22, 2005 at 05:23 PM
Oedipus Tex (the moral of this story is of course, don't love your mother, pardner, save it for your horse)
Posted by: Amos Newcombe | September 22, 2005 at 05:29 PM
Edward Edward
This lends to some nice embellishments:
Edward Edward II
Edward Edward, Esq.
Posted by: ken | September 22, 2005 at 06:10 PM
I'd much prefer Longsword than Shortsword
but "Edward Shortsword" is more fun to say!
Posted by: cleek | September 22, 2005 at 06:28 PM
but how is it pronounced?
[How can I resist a straight line like that?]
"Throat-Warbler Mangrove."
Posted by: ral | September 22, 2005 at 07:05 PM
Edward Unrede
No offense.
Posted by: CharleyCarp | September 22, 2005 at 07:58 PM
Don't have time to read the next two threads to see if anyone's cited this, but on the subject of pork, the Poor Man has outdone himself.
Posted by: Nell L. | September 22, 2005 at 09:20 PM
please send me a about the pork its good for health or not
Posted by: kasun | April 14, 2008 at 06:11 AM