Kim, will you print a retraction based on this evidence?

The truth is there are multiple definitions of earmarks.

For instance the OMB defines earmarks as

OMB defines earmarks as funds provided by the Congress for projects or programs where the congressional direction (in bill or report language) circumvents Executive Branch merit-based or competitive allocation processes, or specifies the location or recipient, or otherwise curtails the ability of the Executive Branch to manage critical aspects of the funds allocation process.

Based on the OMB Palin submitted requests for earmarks? Case closed!

Oooops....the McCain/Palin Lie- O- Meter is about to redline and then explode. Oh hell, what am I talking about, that happened the day he picked her.

dave (lower case intentional) - "Based on the OMB Palin submitted requests for earmarks? Case closed!"

First, let me correct your last sentence, it should read: "Mind Closed," as in your so blinded by partisanship as to not come close to the meaning of your own link.

But hey, I'm always willing to listen. Could you explain further why definitions (muliple even!) of earmarks given by the Federal Gov's Office of Budget and Management pertain to Gov. Palin?

Every definition offered pertains to the Feds and no where, despite you wanting it to, does it give her authority to demand earmark funding. Can she request them? Sure, just like EVERY Gov in the Union but only Congress can approve them and your own link shows she cut back Fed Funding.

And BTW, dave (lower case intentional) you have some unfinished business over here.

Marc,

McCain has claimed Palin did not request any earmarks as governor. I guess that depends on what your definition of earmark IS.

And then what, JFO?

We should suddenly all see how shiny and hopey Obama is, and feel a thrill run up our leg at the prospect of him being President? The guy who quit his community organizer job because he wasn't making a difference? The guy who helped piss away 100 million plus from the Annenberg coffers to no good or lasting effect? The guy who thinks running for office is qualification FOR the office?

We'll suddenly all be converted in followers of the Hopey-Changeful Obamamessiah?

Oh, yeah. That'll happen.

Like the saying goes - there may not be anyone you want to vote FOR, but there'll certainly be someone you want to vote against. And Obama fits THAT parameter perfectly, as far as I'm concerned.

(I also think that McCain'll do a pretty good job as President, and Palin will do fine as VP. I'm not looking for perfection - I'm looking for adequacy and experience. And again, Obama fits neither qualification.)

JFO - "Oooops....the McCain/Palin Lie- O- Meter is about to redline and then explode. Oh hell, what am I talking about, that happened the day he picked her."

Maybe so, but that's your opinion and subject to extreme prejudice.

The other "meter" the one that measures voters sentiment seems to be going in the opposite direction and a faster speed than the meter you cite.

Dave -

Let's let Reid, Pelosi, and Rangel define 'ethical' first.

JLawson,

I have one thing to say to you.

McCain is willing to give up his integrity for the presidency!

dave (lower case intentional) - "McCain has claimed Palin did not request any earmarks as governor. I guess that depends on what your definition of earmark IS."

Sorry, I won't buy your obvious attempt at deflection, you have a problem with it take it up with the McCain campaign.

You can piss your panties 'til the mother of all rashes sets in it won't change the fact that's what ALL governors do.

The FACT is, you do know what those are don't you, Palin didn't ask for earmarks, she asked for federal funding for projects (PDF File). Federal funding that comes via normal appropriations requests and is controlled by the Alaskan legislature not by Palin.

P.S. did you close that unfinished business?

Marc,

The FACT is, the request came from the governors office. The earmarks may have initialized by the Alaskan legislature but that does not change the fact that the request came from Palins office, with Palins letterhead and Palins name on it.

Dave -

And what is Obama willing to give up? Or force us to give up?

You seem to think by trying to discredit McCain that suddenly Obama will look significantly better. That ain't happening.

It just confirms what Dr. Phil has diagnosed John McCain as having:

An advanced case of LIE-abetes.

It seems that some of the trolls here have extreme difficulty with English and are further handicapped by the fact that they wear idiot goggles. If they can't understand who has the ability to request an earmark I have no difficulty in understanding their support for a community organizer. Wasn't Al Capone a community organizer?

dave - "The FACT is, the request came from the governors office. The earmarks may have initialized by the Alaskan legislature but that does not change the fact that the request came from Palins office, with Palins letterhead and Palins name on it."

You really are stuck on stupid aren't you?

From the letterhead you cite:

In preparing these requests, the State has been mindful of congressional [sic] concerns about budget deficits and earmarks. Accordingly, the total number of requests has been significantly reduced from previous years. Approximately two-thirds of the requests involve programs that have been funded previously.

A piece of advice, if I were you I'd spend more time searching for a defense for this rather than tossing rocks at McCain/|Palin that is at best a debatable issue.

There is NO DEBATE who's in the center of the Fanny Mae/Fanny Mac scandal monetarily.

Palin requested federal funds, and in that request specifically cites earmarks as a problem and cites ways in which she tried to limit even the appearance of bad faith on her part. See what happens if you actually look at the facts before forming an opinion, dave?

If Stephens put those requests in as earmarks, that's on HIM. So saying Palin is lying about earmarks is itself a bold-faced lie and easily shown to be such. It's hilarious how you guys can't touch her without further beclowning youselves.

Thomas Jackson,

Please explain with your superior power of reasoning how something that came from Palins office, with Palins letterhead and Palins name on it, should not be counted as coming from Palin.

A Browne - speaking of being stuck on stupid: "It just confirms what Dr. Phil has diagnosed John McCain as having:

First of all, source please and your frontal lobe doesn't count.

Secondly, even if true you're going to cite someone who owes his entire career, such as it is, to the real obama girl, Oprah?

And someone who went against all known medical ethics and attempted to snatch a Pop Star (trying to be nice, honest!) out of a hospital and away from her attending doctors?

Is that right AB?

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, and conclude the topic under discussion is far, FAR over your head and you had to resort to sarcasm.

dave - "Please explain with your superior power of reasoning how something that came from Palins office, with Palins letterhead and Palins name on it, should not be counted as coming from Palin.

Better question, can you quote the part of TJ's comment that claimed the letter didn't come from Palin's office.

I'll repeat, for the reading challenged, dave, you're stuck on stupid.

This rush to focus on the precise definition of "earmark" reeks of obfuscation. The issue is pork-barrel spending (is it OK to say "pork" again?). The fact that earmarks are a significant, but not the exclusive, source of pork is not the issue. Even McCain includes it as just one source of wasteful spending:

in 24 years as a member of Congress, I have never asked for nor received a single earmark or pork barrel project for my state

And the claims that Palin reformed spending are just as meaningless, since she did reduce spending, but to a level that is still by far the highest per-capita in the country. Now there's some real reform for ya.

Even the Ed Morrissey post you link to acknowledges:

Palin technically could legitimately say that she didn't apply for earmarks on projects even if the Alaskan contingent used that process for their state's requests, although it would be somewhat deceptive to try that as an argument.

But don't let that stop you.

The Republican view -

If you grow up in Hawaii, raised by your grandparents, you're "exotic, different."

Grow up in Alaska eating mooseburgers -- a quintessential American story.

If your name is Barack you're a radical, unpatriotic Muslim.

Name your kids Willow, Trig and Track -- you're a maverick.

Graduate from Harvard law School and you are unstable.

Attend five different small colleges before graduating, you're well grounded.

If you spend three years as a brilliant community organizer, become the first black President of the Harvard Law Review, create a voter registration drive that registers 150,000 new voters, spend 12 years as a constitutional law
professor, spend eight years as a state senator representing a district with more than 750,000 people, become chairman of the state Senate's Health and Human Services committee, spend 4 years in the United States Senate representing a state of 13 million people while sponsoring 131 bills and serving on the Foreign Affairs, Environment and Public Works and Veteran's Affairs committees, you don't have any real leadership experience.

If your total resume is: local weather girl, four years on the city council and 6 years as the mayor of a town with fewer than 7,000 people, 20 months as the governor of a state with only 650,000 people, then you're qualified to become the country's second highest ranking executive.

If you have been married to the same woman for 19 years while raising two beautiful daughters, all within Protestant churches, you're not a real Christian.

If you cheated on your first wife with a rich heiress, and left your disfigured wife and married the heiress the next month, you're a Christian.

If you teach responsible, age appropriate sex education, including the proper use of birth control, you are eroding the fiber of society.

If, while governor, you staunchly advocate abstinence only, with no other option in sex education in your state's school system while your unwed teen daughter ends up pregnant, you're very responsible.

If your wife is a Harvard graduate lawyer who gave up a position in a prestigious law firm to work for the betterment of her inner-city community,
then gave that up to raise a family, your family's values don't represent America's.

If your husband is nicknamed "First Dude," with at least one DWI conviction and no college education, who didn't register to vote until age 25 and once was a member of a group that advocated the secession of Alaska from the USA, your family is extremely admirable.

JC, are you sure that's all?

Come on humor us with more. Assuming "more" is on topic.

Wow JC, you've learned how to cut and paste from viral e-mails. Congratulations. Maybe someday you'll grow up and demonstrate that really do have a brain.

Geesh Eric, JC is a much bigger dunce than I thought.

But hardly surprising, the quality of trolls has definitely seen better days.

Yep - total cut and paste job - still, thought it was funny!

Hey JC
Suck it!

JC - "Yep - total cut and paste job - still, thought it was funny!"

No, you thought the possibility of it being true was a point for your side. Assuming you are on that "side." And given you gave ZERO indication you meant that as a "joke" that's a pretty safe assumption.

RFA,

Suck it!!

Right back at ya!! And a fine howdy-do to you!

At any rate, on a serious note - destroying the messenger, doesn't destroy the message. Which is, the silly Republican evaluations of Obama as elitist/lacking American values, while Palin as somehow quintessentially aligned with american values, is a very false view.

Quality and creativity of trolls is incredibly lacking lately. Bummer.

Marc,

It can be funny, AND contain what I consider some truth, for "my" side.

Of course, I'd be happy if there was an assumption that - all of the 4 candidates for P/VP, are deeply, robustly, proud american stories, as all 4 have inspiring biographies, in their way.

So really, if anything (besides the obvious trolling on a rightwing site), this is pushback on any elevation of Palin's "american-ness" over Obama's americanness. That's just silly.

JC - "At any rate, on a serious note"

You claim a "time-out" (for a "serious note") now after foisting off a cut & paste hit job as some type of audition for Last Comic Standing?

Sorry, nothing you say at this point can, or will be taken seriously.

JC - "It can be funny, AND contain what I consider some truth, for "my" side."

Really, so lets get more specific shall we?

Which part of your cut & paste do you consider "truth?"

JC,

Not only was it funny but right on the mark. I had never seen it before. Thanks for posting it! I hope you continue to entertain us with similar postings.

Conservatives, you can play your petty little word games all you like, but even your own [expletive-deleted] Fox News won't sink so low as to play such games:

"Sarah Palin requested $453 million in earmarks" -- Chris Wallace reporting

(and no, I don't watch the [expletive-deleted] Fox News, I saw the video posted on the Web.).

You want to replace "earmarks" with "funding," go ahead, it really doesn't matter.

And now, get this, conservatives:

While John McCain was denouncing "$3 million to study the DNA of bears in Montana," Sarah Palin requested $3.2 million to study the genetics of Harbor Seals.

Ouch, that's got to sting. Stings real bad, doesn't it, conservatives? But hey, we've known for some time now that fiscal responsibility was never one of your strong points.
depp=true
notiz=rude expletive deleted libtard

dave - "Not only was it funny but right on the mark."

That appears as though you may believe some or all of the cut and paste being fact, same question to you, which part?

How's that unfinished business linked to earlier dave? No comment? No shifting of position or at minimum admitting the topic is patented BS?

Funny that Obama has earmarked 938 million dollars and he wants to talk about ear marks. Earmarked a million dollars to his wife's employer. She gets a 100% raise. Sarahs job is to get federal money for her state. Obama's job seems to be funding his friends with federal money (our tax dollars). Obama is just the same old, same old.

That appears as though you may believe some or all of the cut and paste being fact, same question to you, which part?

The entire post was both hilarious enlightening. The part that I thought was most "on the mark" delt with their experience and Palin's college hopping.

I will criticized JC for leaving out two of Palin's achievements. While Obama may have been president of the Harvard Law Review, Palin was the president of her PTA. Another of Palin achievements was coming in second place in a beauty contest. Little known fact - the first place winner was an african-american woman.

Are you kidding me??? The First Dude didn't register to vote till he was 25???

OMG.

Lol.

This is the best election...EVER. :)

Poor Obama. He's going down and it's a bumpy, painful ride.

:)

Apparently the difference between the following terms; "Earmark," "Pork Barrel Spending," and "federal fund transfers to states," has somehow eluded those who are trying to make a mountain out of nothing.

Federal Fund Transfers is so complex a subject I am only going to give it a bare touch here. The terms simply means those funds that Congress allocates through the Executive Branch that goes to the various states for either unrestricted use or semi-restricted use.

This could mean highway funds, sidewalks in some given city, police equipment or manpower, fire equipment, the list is very long. The process for asking for funds is extremely complex and is subject to oversight.

For those who are trying to nail Palin, or for WSJ "Reporters" who have failed to do their homework, fund transfers to various states go through a very thorough vetting process both at the State level, the Executive US level and by Congress.

Pork Barrel Stuff; The term "pork barrel politics" refers to spending that is intended to benefit constituents of a politician in return for their political support, either in the form of campaign contributions or votes.

Here is an interesting fact that will change nobodies mind: "Overall, Democratic freshmen in the House were among the biggest recipients of pork-barrel spending, often securing more money than more senior lawmakers, according to the fiscal watchdog group Taxpayers for Common Sense."

Earmarks: Money sent anywhere for a project that is NOT approved through Congressional vetting processes and NOT part of normal appropriations bills. There are times when an earmark is almost, maybe appropriate. Earmarks are always passed through amendments to other bills and are sponsored by whichever Congress critter wants the money. Earmarks may or may not be port barrel spending.

Sometimes, a Congressman or Senator will decide that he/she doesn't want a particular project sent through normal channels and he/she just gets the money through an earmark.

Earmarks may be requested through normal channels or by persons associated with a project or just made up by the fevered mind of a Congressman/Senator.

Governors rarely request money of any description. Governors normally approve their own legislative process of fund requests, or a given departmental request, such as the Highway Department request for matching funds for communications equipment, as an example. A Governor COULD request an earmark or whatever, so could a monkey or say the hospital where a Congressman's daughter works.

Palin is being beat up on this subject. And that isn't fair.

Leave us look at where Obama stands on the subject.

First, with a lot noise, Obama co-sponsored a bill with Tom Coburn of Ok, THE major anti-pork/earmark Senator called the Federal funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006.

Good for Obama, sorta.

See, Obama still votes FOR earmarks. For example, he voted AGAINST an amendment sponsored by Coborn that would have taken money AWAY from the Bridge to Nowhere and sent to help New Orleans rebuild its levees.

I am not impressed.

I could go on for a long time but Jay might get mad at me, so I will just mention one other Earmark that Obama was all over.

The University of Chicago Medical Center got a one MILLION dollar earmark. Ummm, this is where Michelle Obama worked as a VP. She got a $200K per year raise just after Obama was elected. I guess you say she did a great job, right? She did, she did. Oh, she is in charge of the program that dumps indigents from UCMC onto other medical facilities.

And the kicker is that the PR guy for that hired by UCMC is, (drum roll) David Axelrod. And I will give you two guesses who sponsored the earmark and the first guess doesn't count.

What Obama says and what he does have serious conflicts, unless you have a bad case of PEA poisoning, a subject for another day.

Clear?

Dave~

I hope you continue to entertain us with similar postings.

That is very sad that you find "cut and paste" entertaining.

The entire post was both hilarious enlightening.

You lead a very, very sheltered life.

That is very sad that you find "cut and paste" entertaining.

I laughed when I first read it. Finding out JC did not write did not make it any less funny.

Stop being such a humor snob. Your sounding like one of those elitist types that can't take a joke.

Stop being such a humor snob. Your sounding like one of those elitist types that can't take a joke.

Call me a snob if you like, Dave, but I like jokes that are original and funny. Flooding a comment section with cut and paste is neither, and a waste of band width. I can almost guarantee, however, if the cut and paste was not limited, in Obama's favor, you would not find it so funny.

Call me a snob if you like, Dave, but I like jokes that are original and funny. Flooding a comment section with cut and paste is neither, and a waste of band width. I can almost guarantee, however, if the cut and paste was not limited, in Obama's favor, you would not find it so funny.

LaMedusa: You seem very serious about how you like jokes.

Larry,

Thanks much for one of the few sane posts on this thread. Unfortunately, unless you can compress it into a sentence, it will be beyond the likely comprehension of your adversaries. But thanks, and keep the faith.

LaMedusa: You seem very serious about how you like jokes.

See, Dave? That was funny, and I'll bet you weren't even trying to be.

To be more clear, the wording in the cut and paste e-mail was obviously biased in Obama's favor. If it had not been, you probably would not be laughing or enlightened, no matter who wrote it.

...the wording in the cut and paste e-mail was obviously biased in Obama's favor.

I don't know, seemed pretty fair to me.

I don't know, seemed pretty fair to me.

If you don't like Republicans, it wouldn't surprise me that you find it fair.

Dear dave:

If rantings and picking at straws are evidence of desperation (and they are), you must be very, very desperate.

1. You start off by parroting a charge leveled at Palin by Charley Gibson.

2. You continue by ignoring that Palin answered that question by explaining exactly what she did, what she expected, and how that was in no way "earmarks".

3. You fail to cite any authoritative sources save one, and you misuse/twist that one until it's crying out for mercy.

4. You continue to rant, and disregard the challenges put to you (must have learned that from Bill Burton).

I'm warning you dave, be very, very careful! If you're not, you may accidentally start looking at facts and applying logic. If you do--I'm warning you!--you'll end up a (gasp!!) conservative Republican! BEWARE!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWpU8sX10_4&feature=related

...the wording in the cut and paste e-mail was obviously biased in Obama's favor.

I guess we could make up some realy positive things about Palin. That way the two would seem more equal. Oh wait, thats been tried and now its starting to backfire.

I guess we could make up some realy positive things about Palin. That way the two would seem more equal. Oh wait, thats been tried and now its starting to backfire.

Uh oh. Dave's stuck in stupid again. He answered my previous comment twice, only this time with an insult. Sound's like Dave's very stupid about how he likes fair.

I'm warning you dave, be very, very careful! If you're not, you may accidentally start looking at facts and applying logic.

He's already tried that and now it's starting to backfire. His brain imploded at comment 47. He is the left's unfortunate last choice on the playing field. You know, the one their team got "stuck with".

dave - "Oh wait, thats been tried and now its starting to backfire."

If by "backfire" you mean ObamaMessiah has managed to take mostly double diget leads in the polls for over three months to nearly everywhere be within the margin of error, yes... it is "backfiring."

If not, you're just another clueless partisan who is whistling thru a graveyard at night.

here is Palin's own views on earmarks. Its probably only a misnomer that she can't request earmarks. She can request that her representative in Congress request them for Alaska. Still is shows fiscal responsibility in her requests and an understanding of the system.

Marc,

I bring up the point that McCain/Palin have been lieing about Palins record and its starting to backfire.

I find it interesting that you don't deny the lieing part just the part about it backfiring.

Larry, as hard as it is to properly describe the differences in the terms, you did a decent job. I guess nuance, when applied properly and when necessary, can a bit too inconvenient for some.

Too bad Dave's attention span rarely goes beyond a soundbite or two. He read, with glee and word for word, a cut and paste email disparaging someone he doesn't like, but has nary a word for a serious discussion of the very thing he pretends to understand.

"Your(sic) sounding like one of those elitist types that can't take a joke." - dave

"I don't know, seemed pretty fair to me." - dave

Which is it, dave? Is it a fair characterization or is it just a joke?

I only ask because you're acting like that kid, whose parents brought him to an adult only gathering, and keeps acting out and disrupting conversation in an attempt to garner attention because negative attention is better than none.

Oyster,

To answer your question:

Which is it, dave? Is it a fair characterization or is it just a joke?

It's both. Can you comprehend that? A joke can be funny and truthful at the same time.

I only ask because you're acting like that kid, whose parents brought him to an adult only gathering, and keeps acting out and disrupting conversation in an attempt to garner attention because negative attention is better than none.

Your'e acting like the kid who covers his ears when told something you don't want to here.

If McCain said that a circle has 4 corners and Obama pointed out a circle has no corners. Then if the media points out that McCain does not know how what a circle is. You would probably think the media was being biased and should just report it as Obama and McCain disagree over what a circle is. That appears to have been McCains strategy, but McCain has so over played that card, that the media is fed up with it.

dave - "I find it interesting that you don't deny the lieing part just the part about it backfiring."

Why bring up the obvious. That's being called honest, we both know all political campaigns distort and at the extreme lie about each other.

Dave:

You remind me of a high school girl who has fallen for the local bad boy. In spite of all the efforts of her parents and her more sane peers to inform, she is still making excuses and determined to do what she is doing.

This is called infatuation.

And this is the root, the core of the Obama phenomenum. You guys and ladies are infatuated with Obama. Read page 90 of Audacity and see what Obama has to say on it. I promise you will be shocked. Or maybe not. Those infatuated are as full of rationalization as a typical teenager, with about the same level of reality.

Dave:

I forgot to mention that just as you accuse, you too ignore inconvenient truths. Cat got your tongue? How about commenting on what I posted about earmarks, pork barrel and federal fund transfers.

How about commenting on what I posted about earmarks, pork barrel and federal fund transfers.

Larry, I want to thank you, also, for the information you posted. Unfortunately, it's not a simple cut and paste joke with silly comparisons like "moose burgers" that sound funny. Your information has real value and requires thinking, so it's more like "the willingness to reason" has fried his gray matter. Without the proper applications installed, dave's brain just can't function and goes into "stand-by".

Let's all be realistic.....this is a right wing web site to folks who have let their son's and daughters die for a war criminalist. It's still sad that we sent 130k troops (my fellow brothers and sisters) to Iraq and only a handfull in comparison to Afganistan (where we knew binladen was and that he was in charge of 9/11) Don't give me youe little wining about I don't know.....up until 2001 I was a Republican....I never voted for eaither Bush...putting a big business Oil Man in office is like putting a fox in a hen house.

I'm now a Democrat (although more so on the reginal level not national) I like McSame as he is a Veteran but we as a country can't have 4 more years of the same kind of bush failureship (not leadership...ever) The last 8yrs have seen this country fail as a world leader, the current administration have created mistrust and resentment amongst amny nations and their people. War crimes have been committed, we've been purposelly lied to we've had our privacy invaded (yes palin hack was wrong....I truly dobt they had ANY party affiliation) and our economy has been placed in a recession (If you wish to sing bush's cocain snorting dream that it's not a recession...so be it..live your lie).

Now lets discuss OBAMA do I think he's was the best choice...not really. Do I think he may have killed his chance by not selecting Hillary...yes. I also think he's made alot of promises that will get blocked by Republican house and senate representatives...just to make a point (let's all stop B.S.ing one another both parties do it).The jury is still out on Biden...but I haven't seen much negative out there about him.

I think McCain talks to much like Bush; I think Palin is a hotty but she definatly is shadey at best.

America needs a leader who can cross the isle to get us out of this craphole of a mess the Bush administration has placed us. The only person out there I know for sure has done something independently for or country...would be Nader he fought Big Business Auto Companies and dirty politians and got legislation passed for higher safty requirements from auto companies and strictor safty rules for U.S. highway travel.

Last but not least Do you know how to spot a dirty lieing Republican? They have their mouth open...........LOL..............ROTFLMAO!!!