The Ds are making much of what is called the Rs hypocrisy as exemplified by Senator Cornyn, R-TX placing earmarks in a spending bill and then voting against the bill because he is opposed to earmarks.
I am curious as to what your left leaning friends think of this proposal.
This idea has shown up here before in the comments to Dan Runnels Nov. 22, 2010 post.
Is Donald Trump shrinking?
4 hours ago
Well, I saw some clips from a news conference where Cornyn and John Thune (R from SD) were standing shoulder to shoulder talking big against this spending bill, in part (I think) because of their opposition to the billions in earmarks. Then a reporter asked about the millions in earmarks each had requested in that bill. To my astonishment, both fumbled the question badly, looking like schoolboys caught in a lie. It seemed clear from the body language that they hadn't anticipated the question. They defended the inclusion in the bill by saying that the projects they had earmarked were good projects but that it really didn't matter because they planned to vote against the bill.
ReplyDeleteIt seems there is an easy and better response to make here: "Don't hate the player hate the game. I do not like earmarks, but until we change the game in Washington I cannot disadvantage the constituents in my home state."
Specifically, here's the game the R's seem to have been playing. They are presented with a spending bill that they generally oppose (let's say for principle) and which has lots of Dem support. So, they'll make it as "bad" a bill as possible by loading it up with earmarks and then voting against it -- not something that they'd be eager to admit to, however, as they demonstrated in the news conferencee. If the bill passes without their support, then they can talk highmindedly about their opposition to the Dems' out of control spending, and still reap the benefits back home. If the bill fails because it's gotten too stinky with all the pork, then it's a victory for fiscal conservatism.
I don't think Cornyn and Thune are necessarily hypocrites here, but I think they did come across that way in the news conference because they weren't willing to be a little more forthright about their strategy.