Log In
Create Account
SlickerTalk
Search Archives
The Leaderboard
The FAQ
Login
Create Account
Search
Dr. S. Talk
TT/ST Wiki
How Well Do You Know ...
RSS Feed
Hosting by DigitalOcean
Support ST on Ko-Fi
Links Only
50 Results
100 Results
250 Results
500 Results
1000 Results
5000 Results
2 Weeks
2 Months
6 Months
1 Year
2 Years
5 Years
All Time
Live
Down to Post
Backboards:
Live
________________
1: Dec 1, 17:33
2: Dec 1, 11:23
3: Nov 30, 15:54
4: Nov 30, 09:41
5: Nov 29, 16:44
6: Nov 29, 08:01
7: Nov 28, 16:19
8: Nov 28, 09:42
9: Nov 27, 18:07
10: Nov 27, 12:04
11: Nov 27, 08:26
12: Nov 26, 18:06
13: Nov 26, 12:05
14: Nov 26, 08:29
15: Nov 25, 18:33
16: Nov 25, 11:12
17: Nov 25, 07:08
18: Nov 24, 13:17
19: Nov 23, 18:13
20: Nov 23, 06:17
Posts: 158
In response to
"
actually it means quite a lot.
"
by
znufrii
So in other words, the earmarks are still there, they're just called "ready-to-go local projects" ?
Posted by
Strongbad (aka Rambler14)
Jan 27 '09, 06:26
CHANGE!
Responses:
well, no.
-
znufrii
Jan 27, 06:31
5
allocations of revenue in a bill that are directed to a specific project or recipient typically in a legislator�s home state or district -- nm
-
Strongbad the Belittler
Jan 27, 06:36
3
Considering that this bill is specifically looking for state and local project to fund, you should probably take issue with the whole bill then.
-
ty97
Jan 27, 06:38
2
All I'm doing is holding Obama to his "no earmark" policy.
-
Strongbad the Belittler
Jan 27, 06:42
1
And to be 100% accurate, I'm not holding Obama to it. Yet.
-
Strongbad the Belittler
Jan 27, 06:44
generally I think you've conflated earmarks with pork. -- nm
-
znufrii
Jan 27, 06:34
yep, it's exactly the same thing.
-
ty97
Jan 27, 06:27
1
Woo! -- nm
-
Strongbad the Belittler
Jan 27, 06:28
Post a message
top
Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.
