One of the few bright spots – perhaps the only bright spot – since the Presidential elections is the absence of the annual calls for an anti-flag burning amendment or the “if you don’t wear a flag pin you’re the Anti-Christ” movement. Of course, we still have the War on Christmas, but even Bill O’Reilly’s heart doesn’t seem to be in it this year.

But take heart America, there’s always one loon with Orly Taitzian persistence who’ll never give up on the inane…Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Dumbassasota).

Big surprise, huh?

Dear God, Who Aren’t in Speeches…
This time her special crusade is that Obama doesn’t say God enough – an ‘issue’ so spectacularly stupid, even John Boehner can see it. And to compound the asshattery, her Christian sensibilities were offended by a speech in which Obama actually used the word God – four times by my count.

Go figure.

Bachmann and some in the Congressional Prayer Caucus wrote a letter (.pdf file) to The Messiah™ objecting to his incorrect citing of the phrase, E pluribus unum as our national motto. Nay, nay they say, tis really In God We Trust, as if God’s name isn’t already invoked enough for the American Taliban.

Of course, they are correct. Their Christian forebearers, in 1955,  parted a sea of people who didn’t give a whit to officialize the motto and print it on money because, well, religion and money go together like stink and sh*t.

So OK, the O-Man – or more precisely his speechwriters – don’t know their ass from their motto. If Bachmann wants to criticize that, so be it, she IS correct. But isn’t Obama a bit distracted by a country going down the tubes like a hairball in a freshly plunged toilet? Shouldn’t Bachmann be just a tad worried about such things too.

A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to Earmarklessness
Of course, there are better things for Bachmann, the Congressional Prayer Caucus, and President Careless Bear to do. For example, Bachmann’s crusade against earmarks. Apparently not aware of it herself, some people actually listened to her for once and went along. The problem was – oops – that meant she wouldn’t get any earmarks either. So, she’s decided to “redefine earmarks” in much the same way Christians redefined the national motto as In God We Trust.

Oddly, I’m actually heartened by this news. It only confirms just how goobulent she and her followers are and provides a nice comedic respite from The Party of Hell No and The Party of Pusillanimous Pussies. Clearly, Jay Leno has a thing or two to learn about writing a good comedy monologue.

Michelle, expect a letter from me soon. Your dedication to the public service of making your fellow citizens laugh their asses off in the face economic collapse and an outbreak of leaking wikis is admirable. In fact, it may be the only rock left for an unstable nation to attach itself to.

Thanks Rep. Bachmann, the people of America salute you!

Cross posted at The Omnipotent Poobah Speaks!

One of the few bright spots – perhaps the only bright spot – since the Presidential elections is the absence of the annual calls for an anti-flag burning amendment or the “if you don’t wear a flag pin you’re the Anti-Christ” movement. Of course, we still have the War on Christmas, but even Bill O’Reilly’s heart doesn’t seem to be in it this year.

But take heart America, there’s always one loon with Orly Taitzian persistence who’ll never give up on the inane…Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Dumbassasota).

Big surprise, huh?

Dear God, Who Aren’t in Speeches…
This time her special crusade is that Obama doesn’t say God enough – an ‘issue’ so spectacularly stupid, even John Boehner can see it. And to compound the asshattery, her Christian sensibilities were offended by a speech in which Obama actually used the word God – four times by my count.

Go figure.

Bachmann and some in the Congressional Prayer Caucus wrote a letter (.pdf file) to The Messiah™ objecting to his incorrect citing of the phrase, E pluribus unum as our national motto. Nay, nay they say, tis really In God We Trust, as if God’s name isn’t already invoked enough for the American Taliban.

Of course, they are correct. Their Christian forebearers, in 1955,  parted a sea of people who didn’t give a whit to officialize the motto and print it on money because, well, religion and money go together like stink and sh*t.

So OK, the O-Man – or more precisely his speechwriters – don’t know their ass from their motto. If Bachmann wants to criticize that, so be it, she IS correct. But isn’t Obama a bit distracted by a country going down the tubes like a hairball in a freshly plunged toilet? Shouldn’t Bachmann be just a tad worried about such things too.

A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to Earmarklessness
Of course, there are better things for Bachmann, the Congressional Prayer Caucus, and President Careless Bear to do. For example, Bachmann’s crusade against earmarks. Apparently not aware of it herself, some people actually listened to her for once and went along. The problem was – oops – that meant she wouldn’t get any earmarks either. So, she’s decided to “redefine earmarks” in much the same way Christians redefined the national motto as In God We Trust.

Oddly, I’m actually heartened by this news. It only confirms just how goobulent she and her followers are and provides a nice comedic respite from The Party of Hell No and The Party of Pusillanimous Pussies. Clearly, Jay Leno has a thing or two to learn about writing a good comedy monologue.

Michelle, expect a letter from me soon. Your dedication to the public service of making your fellow citizens laugh their asses off in the face economic collapse and an outbreak of leaking wikis is admirable. In fact, it may be the only rock left for an unstable nation to attach itself to.

Thanks Rep. Bachmann, the people of America salute you!

Cross posted at The Omnipotent Poobah Speaks!

One of the few bright spots – perhaps the only bright spot – since the Presidential elections is the absence of the annual calls for an anti-flag burning amendment or the “if you don’t wear a flag pin you’re the Anti-Christ” movement. Of course, we still have the War on Christmas, but even Bill O’Reilly’s heart doesn’t seem to be in it this year.

But take heart America, there’s always one loon with Orly Taitzian persistence who’ll never give up on the inane…Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Dumbassasota).

Big surprise, huh?

Dear God, Who Aren’t in Speeches…
This time her special crusade is that Obama doesn’t say God enough – an ‘issue’ so spectacularly stupid, even John Boehner can see it. And to compound the asshattery, her Christian sensibilities were offended by a speech in which Obama actually used the word God – four times by my count.

Go figure.

Bachmann and some in the Congressional Prayer Caucus wrote a letter (.pdf file) to The Messiah™ objecting to his incorrect citing of the phrase, E pluribus unum as our national motto. Nay, nay they say, tis really In God We Trust, as if God’s name isn’t already invoked enough for the American Taliban.

Of course, they are correct. Their Christian forebearers, in 1955,  parted a sea of people who didn’t give a whit to officialize the motto and print it on money because, well, religion and money go together like stink and sh*t.

So OK, the O-Man – or more precisely his speechwriters – don’t know their ass from their motto. If Bachmann wants to criticize that, so be it, she IS correct. But isn’t Obama a bit distracted by a country going down the tubes like a hairball in a freshly plunged toilet? Shouldn’t Bachmann be just a tad worried about such things too.

A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to Earmarklessness
Of course, there are better things for Bachmann, the Congressional Prayer Caucus, and President Careless Bear to do. For example, Bachmann’s crusade against earmarks. Apparently not aware of it herself, some people actually listened to her for once and went along. The problem was – oops – that meant she wouldn’t get any earmarks either. So, she’s decided to “redefine earmarks” in much the same way Christians redefined the national motto as In God We Trust.

Oddly, I’m actually heartened by this news. It only confirms just how goobulent she and her followers are and provides a nice comedic respite from The Party of Hell No and The Party of Pusillanimous Pussies. Clearly, Jay Leno has a thing or two to learn about writing a good comedy monologue.

Michelle, expect a letter from me soon. Your dedication to the public service of making your fellow citizens laugh their asses off in the face economic collapse and an outbreak of leaking wikis is admirable. In fact, it may be the only rock left for an unstable nation to attach itself to.

Thanks Rep. Bachmann, the people of America salute you!

Cross posted at The Omnipotent Poobah Speaks!

What are we talking about, exactly, when we talk about earmarks?

The kerfuffle this week over the omnibus spending bill signed by Obama centered around one concept: earmarks as porkbarrel projects that waste taxpayer money. John McCain led the anti-earmark charge with Tweets about Mormon locusts and bee rehabilitation. And tattoo removal! Defenders of the bill respond by pointing to the tiny percentage of spending earmarks represent.

As Jonathan noticed, the cable news nets fell into the same so-much-wasted-money trap.

But the problem doesn't seem as simple as denouncing all earmarks as wasteful. Bees pollinate our crops, and I wouldn't be quick to brush-off their needs. Gang members attempting to re-enter society sometimes need help removing the markings of their former lives. Many of these projects have merit. Not all, but many.

The problem with earmarks is the un-transparent, corrupting nature of the process behind them.

David Heath at the Seattle Times has done great work documenting the issue, and the way he frames the problem makes a lot of sense:

Earmarks are federal dollars that members of Congress dole out to favor seekers — often campaign donors. In the process, lawmakers advocate for the companies, helping them bypass the normal system of evaluation and competition. This can result in earmarks that are wasteful or potentially harmful.

This is a process issue. Obviously certain projects funded by earmarks are worthy - but a system allocates the funding in a way that avoids scrutiny and potentially creates motives of self-enrichment by legislators is deeply problematic. The result is a warped political process where the government funds the construction of boats that no one wants or needs. McCain's led the 'this-is-all-tremendous-waste' argument, which has come to define earmarks. But the biggest problem isn't the amount of money, per se; it's the warped incentive system it creates for elected politicians.

There's more...

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has been tracking  House Republicans who try to take credit for provisions in the economic stimulus or 2009 omnibus spending bill, even after voting against both measures.

The latest addition to the "House Republicans' Hypocrisy Hall of Fame" is Representative Tom Latham of Iowa's fourth district. He has been sending out press releases touting earmarks he inserted in the 2009 omnibus spending bill, without mentioning that he didn't support the bill on the House floor. This is from the DCCC's press release of March 12:

In a striking example of hypocrisy, after voting against the recently enacted FY 2009 Omnibus Appropriations, Congressman Tom Latham is taking credit for millions of dollars included in the legislation that will help local community colleges, health care clinics, and renewable energy producers in  Iowa 's 4th Congressional District.

"Congressman Latham keeps telling people he `secured' millions of dollars in funding for Iowa, but the truth is he voted against these investments," said Gabby Adler, the Midwestern Regional Press Secretary for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.  "Congressman Latham can't hide from his voting record, no matter how hard he tries.  Counter to what Congressman Latham would have you believe, these millions of dollars aren't coming to Iowa because of his hard work, these investments are being made in spite of Congressman Latham's efforts to defeat this bill and the funding for Iowa."

In every single press release sent out by Congressman Latham announcing investments for Iowa included in the FY 2009 Appropriations, he not only hid the fact he voted against the legislation but he led people to believe he championed its passage.  One release read Congressman Latham "once again this past week demonstrated his commitment to community colleges," another one discussed his role as a "long-time supporter" of new health care technologies.  In a third release, Congressman Latham even referred to his support of Iowa's renewable energy industry as "steadfast" despite his vote against $1.4 million for a cutting edge wind energy project in Iowa.

After the jump I've posted the rest of the DCCC's release, which contains further details about the earmarks Latham voted against but is now taking credit for.

The two-faced Republican position on earmarks is truly sickening.

Latham may feel secure in IA-04 for 2010 after receiving more than 60 percent of the vote last November. However, in 2012 he will probably have to run in a redrawn third district, which may not be as friendly as his current turf. For that reason, I have wondered whether voting for some of President Barack Obama's policies would be in Latham's political interest, or whether he would be better off rejecting every significant White House proposal, like most House Republicans.

Apparently Latham plans to have it both ways and hope Iowans don't notice.

There's more...