spendthrift wants the job

[LDB]

You probably won't see this story in your local media anytime soon. According to Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW), Hillary Clinton personally ushered 261 earmarks through Congress this year, nearly 200 more earmarks than the other leading presidential candidates, COMBINED.

Her earmarks include more than $300,000 for the Gay Men's Health Center of New York and $1.5 million for the Abyssinian Development
Corporation (ADC), a Harlem-based non-profit whose leader gave her presidential campaign a major endorsement last weekend..

For the complete CNSNews.com report:

Top Earmark-er Clinton Grants $303,000 to 'Gay' Lobby Group -- 01/24/2008

 

[Turtle]

That's a pretty weak article, with an agenda of its own. It's more of a gay bashing disguised as Clinton bashing. It compares her earmarks to other presidential candidates, in numbers of earmarks, to illustrate the point of just how wildly she spends. That should be bad enough but it comes across as not just bad, but, "Look what she's spending your money on!!!!!, OMG!!!!"


Instead of bashing gays the author of the article should have done a little more cursory research in order to show just how frightening Mrs. Clinton can be when she's got her hands firmly wrapped around the wallet of America. Between 2002 and 2006, Mrs. Clinton has secured 360 pure pork earmarks worth a combined $2.2 Billion in all spending and authorization bills. That'll scare you straight.

The plan from the very beginning was for her to roll up her legislative sleeves and bring home the bacon for her constituents, as much as she can, which will then translate into what she can do for the working people of the nation were she to become president. She's banking, literally, on the American people saying, "Wow, look what she did for New York. Imagine what she can do for me!"

She's also banking on the American people not realizing that in order for her to give them their bacon, she's got to take their pig from them first.
Be afraid. Be very afraid.

 

[LDB]

Newsmax.com - Pastor Got Earmark Money Before Clinton Endorsement

I agree the original post was biased however the underlying point of her thievery from citizens is sound. Here's another.

 

[arkjarhead]

I don't think giving inmates in prison condoms is a good idea. I mean the officers in the prisons are already having a hard enough time keeping them from having sex with each other, and these clowns go and encourage it. Plus most time they are having sex in prison it's about dominance not about so called homosexual love, and the one's doing the raping don't care if they have a rubber on or not.

 

[Turtle]

I agree the original post was biased however the underlying point of her thievery from citizens is sound. Here's another.

The original article's underlying point was about gay bashing, and they used Clinton's earmarks to illustrate it. Now, this article is a "Bash Butts" article, using a Clinton earmark as justification. Hillary's reckless spending is so blatant that the use of a particular agenda to illustrate is is superfluous.

Here's an article from the Los Angeles Times that is a little more even in their approach. The three page article is well worth the read. It does briefly semi-focus in the development of a large shopping mall, but rather than use that as some kind of hot button issue to garner rage (certainly not as hot as gays or controversial black preachers) it uses it to detail how ridiculous earmarks, and hers in particular, can get.

For a real eye opener about pork barrel spending, visit the Citizens Against Government Waste, a political watchdog that has only the agenda of reducing waste, no matter who is doing the wasting. There you will find details of all of the pork barrel spending.

You will find things like my home state senator Mitch McConnell secured $3 Million for the Animal Waste Management Research Laboratory.

Apparently, somebody thinks there's a better way to handle
beaver piss

and turkey turds.

{In the interest of fairness, over the objection of the senator, the $3 million was subsequently reduced to $2,231,000.00 because it was felt that $3,000,000.00 was excessive.}

 

[Black Sheep]

If this article from CBS (which is not a bastion of conservatism) is factual, then how can it be construed to be bashing gays? One might conclude that from facts and records given, the Clintons will pay off any constituency in return for support. This activity falls in line with the pardon given the FALN terrorists by Slick Willie in order to secure the Hispanic vote for Hillary's first senate campaing. It wasn't too long ago that Willie was quoted as saying "you gotta do what you gotta do" to win an election. That's probably one of his deepest thoughts, in spite of not being original. However, it typifies the corruption and ruthlessness of the Clintons and their dedication to securing power no matter what the cost.

 

[Turtle]

If this article from CBS (which is not a bastion of conservatism) is factual,

It's not from CBS, the television network, which is rather liberal, it's from CNS (Cybercast News Service), which is, in fact, most definitely a bastion of conservatism and the politically active religious right. They present the news in their own way in their own slant. The only difference between them and many other Internet "news" services is they don't pretend to be fair and balanced.

then how can it be construed to be bashing gays?

I read the article.

One might conclude that from facts and records given, the Clintons will pay off any constituency in return for support.

One might. Two, I dunno. The thing is, Mrs Clinton does that very thing a lot, a lot, a lot. Yet, instead of focusing on that very topic, the article focused on needle exchange, prison condom distribution, HIV/AIDS and the Gay Men's Health Clinic.

The article was classically crafted from Journalism 101 class to hit the hot button issues in the "meat" of the article (the part of the article that most people will read and then get tired of reading and then move on to something else as soon as the hot button issues quite being discussed", and then to cover the bases with a quick glossing over of the other examples from her and other candidates.

It's an article with an agenda, written for a specific audience for a specific purpose. All in all, not bad, but for the most part completely unnecessary, as Hillary's record should be hot button enough on its own. Hillary has done enough on her own for people to be mad at her.

The article is saying be mad, and don't vote for her, because she's trading earmarks for donations, but juuust in case that's not enough, juuuuust in case the readers aren't mad enough, they toss in needle exchange for the HIV/AIDS infected (which is always be linked with gays in the minds of many on the religious right), condoms in prisons (you, know, where they have all that gay sec and stuff), and the fact that all this horrific stuff is being earmarked and administered by the <gasp> Gay Men's Health Clinic.

Now that I think about it, maybe you're right. It really isn't about gay bashing, it's about using gays to bash Hillary. Well, at least them gays are good for something.

Pass the condoms, Bubba.

 

[Black Sheep]

Well, slap me silly for trying to read that article in a hurry without wearing my readers. By George, that is an "N" there between the C and S. However, the content is still the same and Hillary's earmarks are still there. Gay bashing...maybe, but I've seen worse. They barely mentioned the issue of allowing HIV/AIDS carriers into the country, which is much more likely to get a reaction from the average man on the street. I don't see condom distribution in prisons or needle exchange programs as kitchen table topics in an election year. I suppose there's a bit of irony in the fact that the far-left Code Pink and Act Up crowd is actually campaigning against Hillary - she's not liberal enough for them. Anyway, just my opinion and that's only worth what people are willing to pay for it.