-
Expanding Access to Health Insurance: Obama-Style
May 17, 2012 | 2 comments
-
The Washington Post Makes the Case for School Choice
April 15, 2012 | 20 comments
-
Mitt Romney's Tattered Economic Credentials
January 20, 2012 | 6 comments
-
Service Personnel Prefer Ron Paul
December 24, 2011 | 158 comments
-
No Christmas Celebrations in Baghdad
December 24, 2011 | 16 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Reports Jonathan Karl of ABC News:
The House Appropriations Committee just posted its $410 billion 2009 Omnibus spending bill. It's a doozy. This is the bill that will fund the government's operations until the end of the fiscal year. It's larded with thousands (so many, I can't count them all yet) of earmarks and adds up an increase in overall discretionary spending of more than 8 percent, the biggest one year increase since 1978 (with the exception of the spending boost after the September 11 attacks).
And this is a bi-partisan feeding frenzy. Roughly 40 percent of the money for earmarks (i.e. pet projects inserted by individual lawmakers) have been inserted by Republicans.
Don't these people ever learn?
View all comments (1) | Leave a comment
Leave a Comment
More Blog Posts by Doug Bandow
http://spectator.org/blog/2009/02/23/the-gop-answers-obamas-fuzzy-m
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- The Last in Line
- The Ineffective Greenhouse
- In Midst of Poverty, an Educational Oasis
SPONSORED LINKS
Special Feature
Better that we become a nation of choosers rather than beggars. Our symposium on choice from the May, 2012 issue:
FLASHBACK TO: 1984
-
The Fairness Delusion
The speech our President should make.
-
Media Smears: One Man’s Experiences
A noted economist fires back.
-
Chuck Colson vs. The Fundamentalists
How political can you get?
-
The Reagan Doctrine
You might have missed it, but it was boomed in January.
-
The Woman Problem
Farcical feminism is a decades-old phenomenon, as George Will's essay from 1970 reminds us.
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Deborah| 2.24.09 @ 5:00AM
I keep wondering if there is even one politician in Washington, D.C. who actually believes in the country anymore. Is there one "public servant" who is concerned about the future of the country and not the future of his/her job. I believe one must have to be a sociopath (or a lawyer, but that's pretty redundant) in order to go into and remain in politics. How do these folks look at themselves in the mirror?