Ethics and Earmarks

[RMNIXON]

Even Mr. Clean Barack Obama is not immune:

Michelle Obama's hospital: On senator's wish-list

by Mike Dorning

Among the pork-barrel spending requests Barack Obama has made since arriving in the U.S. Senate is $1 million for the hospital where his wife worked at the time and $8 million for weapons technology made by a big defense contractor with close ties to a major fundraiser.

Obama released on Thursday a list of all his requests for earmarked federal spending in 2005 and 2006. He already had released a list of spending requests made in 2007.

In among them was a request for $1 million in federal funding in 2006 for a new pavilion at the University of Chicago Hospitals, where his wife, Michelle Obama, was a vice president at the time. The request was not ultimately included when Congress passed spending legislation that year, according to the Obama campaign.

That same year, Obama requested $8 million in funding for “High Explosive Air Burst Technology” made by General Dynamics, a military contractor with close ties to a major fundraiser.

Obama’s Illinois Finance Chairman, billionaire James S. Crown, a longtime Obama supporter who has raised at least $200,000 for his presidential campaign, is a director of General Dynamics, and his family has a large investment in the company. The request ultimately resulted in $1.3 million in funding for the project.

Tommy Vietor, a spokesman for the Obama campaign, said the senator did not discuss the requests with either his wife or Crown. Vietors also said that Michelle Obama never lobbied for her employer and noted that the University of Chicago hospitals is the largest Medicaid provider in Chicago.
After Obama released his earmark requests, his campaign challenged rival Hillary Clinton to do the same.



“Bringing real change requires changing the way we do business in Washington,” Obama Communications Director Robert Gibbs said in a press release e-mailed to reporters with the list. “If Senator Clinton will not agree to join Senator Obama in releasing her earmark requests, voters should ask why she doesn’t believe they have the right to know she wants to spend their tax dollars.”

But Clinton spokesman Phillipe Reines noted that any funding requests she made were subjected to scrutiny by other members of Congress and that projects that successfully were incorporated in legislation are disclosed.

"Senator Clinton is proud of the investments in New York that she has secured as Senator," Reines said. "All of her requests have been considered as part of the legislative process and were subject to debate and accountability. She has made public the funding she has helped to secure and will make public the requests she submits this year."

The Swamp

[Rouger2]

Originally Posted by lew

You realize we don't have a free market here in America, right? You do know that right?


We have a blend of mercantilism and corporatism here, with a big chunk of socialism, and with a dash of free market capitalism.


The Housing Bubble and Crash we are having now is not a result of the free market. Free market economists have been predicting this disaster for years and have tried to tell people about it and how to prevent it. But no one listened.

Free Market means no restrictions on the market. Free means absolutely none and that would include any restrictions on letting fools sell houses to people who could never afford a house in a million years, and making the economy go down the tubes for the rest of us. Free markets don't work there has to be some restrictions just the right ones.

[lew]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Jesus said help the poor and pay your taxes, the Gospel speaks clearly of respecting earthly authority, and especially christian earthly authority, the only (bible-recorded) christian earthly authority was communist

You want me to find you a line where Jesus supports a tyrannical and slave-driven pagan Roman Empire when their taxes went mostly to finance brutal occupations? Right

There were no christian democracies when Jesus was teaching, therefor he COMMANDED his followers on a social gospel, to give all they could to help the poor, as I said if this was done world poverty would be done by tommorow, since this has failed, you can either give up on the message of Jesus, or find fair and consistent ways to answer his call

In no way whatsoever, can the Christianity of the Gospels ever be perverted so much to think that Jesus wanted people to horde their wealth and then cut themselves off from their fellow man by retreating into rural Montana and living as an island with your guns

That has to be one of the most anti-christian lifestyles ever laid out

If people want to believe that they're going to have to found a new religion

I never said any of that.

[lew]

Originally Posted by Rouger2

Free Market means no restrictions on the market. Free means absolutely none and that would include any restrictions on letting fools sell houses to people who could never afford a house in a million years, and making the economy go down the tubes for the rest of us. Free markets don't work there has to be some restrictions just the right ones.

In a free market, housing lenders wouldn't lend money to people that they know wouldn't be able to afford a house.


The entire boom and bust we are experiencing is precisely because of regulations, subsidies, and other involvement by the government in this industry the past several years.


This would never have happened in a free market.


The only right restrictions are the ones that the industries impose upon themselves. Government regulations and restrictions never work, they always ultimately fail.

[Thorgrim]

So basically, theologians from all walks of life and differing christian beliefs, who agree on certain things, are stupid and wrong compared to one guy writing in his basement who describes himself:

Born in Austin, Texas and raised in the Leander, Texas hill country, the native-born Augustinian James Redford is a young born again Christian who was converted from atheism by a direct revelation from Jesus Christ. He is a scientific rationalist who considers that the Omega Point (i.e., the physicists' technical term for God) is an unavoidable result of the known laws of physics. His personal website can be found here: The Truth About the 9/11 Attacks

You really think this is the way to obtain the best knowledge...find as many libertarian links as you can until you've cut and paste yourself a comfortable world view?

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by lew

In a free market, housing lenders wouldn't lend money to people that they know wouldn't be able to afford a house.


The entire boom and bust we are experiencing is precisely because of regulations, subsidies, and other involvement by the government in this industry the past several years.


This would never have happened in a free market.


The only right restrictions are the ones that the industries impose upon themselves. Government regulations and restrictions never work, they always ultimately fail.

Your first sentence is off...unregulated banking has existed in the course of humanity

the recourse was that banks made loans, and on increased risk they'd charge outrageous interest, but those who did take loans, and even those who didn't...things happened, banks went under, recessions hit, they failed

the free market for banks was an absolute failure and no one ever wants to go back to that

[Scrum]

Originally Posted by lew

In a free market, housing lenders wouldn't lend money to people that they know wouldn't be able to afford a house.

And how did regulation make that happen?

As far as I know, nobody was forcing lenders to give these huge loans without checking up on the people they were lending to. They chose to do that themselves. If anything this is a good example of what happens when you allow large corporations to run unchecked in the market.

Originally Posted by lew

The entire boom and bust we are experiencing is precisely because of regulations, subsidies, and other involvement by the government in this industry the past several years.

I'll agree with you on the subsidies. These businesses knew that they could go suck on the government tit, issue a few lay offs and everything would be fine.

[lew]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

So basically, theologians from all walks of life and differing christian beliefs, who agree on certain things, are stupid and wrong compared to one guy writing in his basement who describes himself:



You really think this is the way to obtain the best knowledge...find as many libertarian links as you can until you've cut and paste yourself a comfortable world view?

ad hominem

[lew]

Originally Posted by Scrum

And how did regulation make that happen?

As far as I know, nobody was forcing lenders to give these huge loans without checking up on the people they were lending to. They chose to do that themselves. If anything this is a good example of what happens when you allow large corporations to run unchecked in the market.

I'll agree with you on the subsidies. These businesses knew that they could go suck on the government tit, issue a few lay offs and everything would be fine.

Regulation made that happen because subsidies are always hand in hand with regulations.

The reason banks were giving out those ridiculous loans is because they knew that if shit hit the fan, the feds would bail them out - which is precisely what happened. In a free market, you can't depend on the Fed to bail you out when you have unwise business ventures.

[lew]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Your first sentence is off...unregulated banking has existed in the course of humanity

the recourse was that banks made loans, and on increased risk they'd charge outrageous interest, but those who did take loans, and even those who didn't...things happened, banks went under, recessions hit, they failed

the free market for banks was an absolute failure and no one ever wants to go back to that

The free market for banks was not an absolute failure. What has been an absolute failure is the current system. The current system is what led to the Great Depression (it was not the free market ) and is what led to the current crises.

The free market is not a perfect system. Of course not. There will be banks that go under (just like with all industries, some businesses make it and others don't), recessions hit, etc. But the alternative to the free market, a "managed" market is not the answer. It has only made things worse.

[Thorgrim]

Yes it was, it lead to people keeping money/gold coins/whatever...under their bed instead of in the economy...which is the worst thing for anyone to do in an economic crisis...the absolute worst

now that people know the federal government will insure your money, they'll gladly put it in the market knowing it's fully insured