A good start, Obamessiah, but if you're really a "breath of fresh air" you should be on the short list of people in congress who neither asked for nor received a single earmark LIKE MCAIN!

I like how the money for new fitness centers at Chicago Park District buildings is called "obesity prevention."

Earmark language is hilarious. Most of this stuff is entirely on the up and up. Why didn't Obama just include these in original legislation that was voted on instead of having them inserted as earmarks? Makes you wonder what Hillary's hiding.

I don't want to see any more fee increases out of the MSI, either now that they have $3 million of our tax dollars: Obama Requested $3 million For The Museum Of Science and Industry’s Expansion Of Its Center For Human Exploration/Henry Crown Space Center. In 2006, Obama requested $3 million for the Museum of Science and Industry’s Center for Human Exploration. They is the largest science and technology museum in the Western Hemisphere. The museum houses 1,070 total pieces, of which 678 are interactive units and 48 are complete exhibits. Central to the Museums revitalization plan is the transformation of the Henry Crown Space Center. Through the renovation and improvement of the space center, the museum proposes to further its commitment of providing current science and technology advances to visitors. The Museum is asking for assistance in the cost of planning, developing, initiating and evaluating the $27 million Space Center. The expansion of the center would enhance the innovative educational programs and exhibits the Museum currently offers. [Obama Request Letter To The Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, 4/6/06]

Clinton's much, much too busy to release her earmarks. Just like she's much too busy to make a phone call telling a staffer to release her taxes.

Well, we have six weeks until the next election. I wonder if she'll be able to find time before Pennsylvania to release both? Probably not. Must be tough, being that busy all the time.

Jeff,

I hope they don't improve it to the point they ruin it. It is a great historical science center also, with past tech. on display.

It's been years since I last saw the place. Even then the new entrance spoiled the effect of entering the place. I always enjoyed the long climb up the marble stairs and entering directly into the main exhibit hall. The impact was awesome. (as the kids like to say.)

Jeff,

I think it's time for John W McBush to stop lying to the American people.

WASHINGTON — Senator John McCain likes to present himself as the candidate of the "Straight Talk Express" who does not pander to voters or change his positions with the political breeze. But the fine print of his record in the Senate indicates that he has been a lot less consistent on some of his signature issues than he has presented himself to be so far in his presidential campaign.

Mr. McCain, who derided his onetime Republican competitor Mitt Romney for his political mutability, has himself meandered over the years from position to position on some topics, particularly as he has tried to court the conservatives who have long distrusted him. His most striking turnaround has been on the Bush tax cuts, which he voted against twice but now wants to make permanent. Mr. McCain has also expressed varying positions on immigration, torture, abortion and Donald H. Rumsfeld, the former defense secretary.
The article points out that McCain has reversed course on several key issues as he has tried to gain the support of the Republican base. To summarize the article:

On tax cuts...

In 2001, McCain voted against Bush's tax cuts, saying "I cannot in good conscience support a tax cut in which so many of the benefits go to the most fortunate among us, at the expense of middle-class Americans who most need tax relief." He also voted against additional tax cuts in 2003, later saying that "I just thought it was too tilted to the wealthy, and I still do."
Today, McCain wants to make those tax cuts permanent.

On immigration...

In 2005, McCain supported comprehensive immigration reform, which included a pathway to citizenship.
Now, he claims that "if his original proposal came to a vote on the Senate floor, he would not vote for it."

On abortion and Roe v. Wade...

In 1999, McCain said that he would not support overturning Roe v. Wafe "int he sort term, or even the long term," because that would "force X number of women in America" to undergo "illegal and dangerous operations."
Today, McCain has campaigned on overturning Roe v. Wade.

On his revisionist history regarding Donald Rumsfeld...

In 2004, McCain refused to call for Rumsfeld's resignation, saying that Bush "can have the team around him that he wants around him." In 2006, retired generals called for Rumseld's resignation, but McCain did not.
Now, while running for president, McCain has claimed that "I’m the only one that said that Rumsfeld had to go." The article notes that "[t]he campaign has since acknowledged that Mr. McCain was incorrect, and more recently the senator has stopped short of claiming he called for the defense secretary’s ouster."

On torture...

McCain has traditionally been against torture, citing his experience as a POW for his decision.
Now, McCain voted last month "against a bill that would require the Central Intelligence Agency to abide by the restrictions on interrogating prisoners outlined in the Army Field Manual."

In his decades in office, McCain has an average party unity score in the low 80s. Since he has campaigned for president, his party unity score has skyrocketed (link, link).

2005: 81%
2006: 76%
2007: 90%

John McCain has 59 lobbyists raising money for his campaign, and yet he said "I'm the only one the special interests don't give any money to."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gEROVh8zK4

McCain's Cronies: All Aboard The Lobbyist Expres:

"Gosh, who could have predicted that close and substantial ties to lobbyists for St. McCain might lead to some uncomfortable questions. Meet John McCain's Airbus campaign plane -- and his fundraising lobbyist pals who work for Airbus. Let's start with names":

“McCain has spoken out for years against the influence of special interests in Washington, but his campaign includes a number of prominent Washington lobbyists, including campaign manager Rick Davis, who founded a lobbying firm, and top political adviser, Charles R. Black Jr., chief executive of a well-known Washington firm. Neither of them lobbied for Airbus."

http://firedoglake.com/2008/03/12/mccains-cronies-all-aboard-the-lobbyist-express/

It's time to start taking a closer look at John McCain's disparate record instead of taking his "maverickness" at face value.

There are good earmarks and there are bad earmarks. McCainiacs just don't get it. Modernizing water treatment facilities = Good. Sandblasting a Confederate icon's statue = Bad.

Transparency is a major difference between Obama and Clinton. Clinton will be as opaque as Bush. Secrecy and spin, a liars administration.

Great start! This level of transparency is what we should expect from all elected officials.

I love the MSI, too, C.Morris. I hear it's going to be a major renovation. Hopefully they can reopen the original entrance. It's nice to have some part of "the White City" left.

Hillary is not to busy to release tax, and first lady paper, for her supporters to investage, that will be the same when and if elected
There is no sex scandal, but one of her sleaz ball friend headed to prison once again.

Did Hillary know the call girls?

Hillary just what do you know?

Hillary did you see them at hotel?

Hillary did you again have to return money, since he endorse you?

What kind of people you surround yourself with? He is not black, for sure.

"He didn't join the McCain anti-earmark club on Thursday"

I hate to nitpick ya, Mike, but Obama actually did endorse Senator DeMint's legislation to ban earmarks for fiscal 2008. So did Clinton. Although both did it months after McCain and DeMint started their crusade.

Here's the AP story: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080311/ap_on_el_pr/mccain_pet_projects

All three of them were, I believe, voting for it today in the senate. Any news on if this came up for a vote and passed today, Mike? I can't find anything on the internets... stupid series of tubes.

It is lies, stupid (Election 08)

"Everybody in politics lies, but they [Clintons] do it with such ease (without compuction) its troubling", David Geffen the Clintons former friend from Hollywood.

One wonders what did they do him ?

Maybe we also need to go through both of their underwear drawers, freezers, bathroom medicine cabinets as well. Much better than talking about issues. McCain must be loving this...

“. . . Most of this stuff is entirely on the up and up. . . .”

* * * * *

Posted by: Jeff | March 13, 2008 3:05 PM

Jeff,

No, most of it isn’t on the up and up. For example, just look at the details of what Obama’s earmarks were for, and then compare that to the powers vested in Congress by Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution. You will then discover that Congress doesn’t have the power to do even half the stuff that Obama has proposed for funding – under any theory of Constitutional law.

Your inability to tell the difference is why you are a Republican, but not really a conservative.

Sorry if I'm not pure enough for you, John. Hey, I agree that congress doesn't have the power to do hardly any of this stuff, but that's not what the argument's about on this thread. If we can take away the most insidious method of illegal appropriation, earmarking, then aren't we doing the constitution a service by at least forcing a vote on this stuff?

I'd love to go back to the 15% flat tax and all the other good stuff that people like Huckabee and Ron Paul advocate, but we have to start somewhere and earmarks seem like a much more winnable battle to me.

Horse, John, then cart.

*****
Posted by: Jeff | March 13, 2008 5:14 PM

Jeff:

It’s not a question of purity. I’m sure that whatever your political beliefs are, you believe them purely.

It’s a question of orthodoxy. We are never going to make work correctly unless we have Constitutional orthodoxy in our government. Not only is it the best argument for conservatism, it is the only way we can achieve any permanent restraint on Congress. We need people in Congress who really know what the Constitution says, and are willing to follow it.

I view the end of earmarks as only a baby step. It is a baby step because it would only remove a method of wasteful spending, rather than the willingness or ability to do so. I do not share your belief that doing things in baby steps is going to help that much. We have too many Republicans in Congress, of the likes of Alaska Senator Ted Stevens, who could help all the other spendthrifts work around the loss of earmarks and keep pork-barrel spending at its current level or worse. They need to go. What we need is a revolution, not a band-aid.

Okay, I just looked at this in more detail. There is a HUGE impropriety in one of these earmarks.

$1 Million was requested for the construction of a new hospital pavilion at the University Of Chicago. The request was put in in 2006.

You know who works for the University of Chicago Hospital?

Michelle Obama. She's vice president of community affairs.

In 2006, the Chicago Tribune reported that Mrs. Obama’s compensation at the University of Chicago Hospital, where she is a vice president for community affairs, jumped from $121,910 in 2004, just before her husband was elected to the Senate, to $316,962 in 2005, just after he took office."

Looks like that raise was worth it. Maybe Barack got his trust fund, after all.

McCain may not have done earmarks in the traditional sense but he gave a big fat one to Airbus. Clinton should discuss her relationship to Northrop Grumman.

Billary will release their earmarks right after they release those tax documents. And after they release the list of donors for the Clinton Libraray.

Chelsea in 2016 - she's got 8 years experience in the White House and will be ready on day 1

Jenna Bush in 2024

2 families, 1 way. Yeah!!

"Jeff", looks like the U. of Chicago hospital got their money's worth when they tripled Michelle Obama's salary just after he took office!

One more sordid detail: the hospital exec who gave Mrs. Obama that big raise happened, doubtless by coincidence, to be a big Obama campaign contributor.

This is just a stunt by Obama. Instead of challenging Senator Clinton to release her earmarks, he should explain the one that went to the hospital and the one benefitting the Crowns among others. Would he have done this without a push from McCain? This is a good example of how he reacts instead of having the original idea. Earmarks should be banned. If a legislator wants deliver something to his constituents, he should have to go through regular legislation getting an up or down vote.