Earmarks & John McCain’s Top 10…Excerpt

This morning Senator John McCain is twittering through his top 10 list of earmarks. At publishing he’d only gotten #10 through #7 tweeted. Here’s some facts about his Top Ten that apparently his staff didn’t bother to vet out.

#10: 1.7M for honey bee factory in Texas. Two things: In case the Senator doesn’t know it the ag business is having a real problem with bee pollination as there’s been an unexplained drop in bee population. If there’s a new plant being built they, presumably, will have to either help other breed more bee’s to produce more honey or do it themselves.

Dateline: Science Daily Feb, 2008 using materials in part provided by the US Dept of Agriculture: In response to a fast-spreading syndrome called colony collapse disorder (CCD) that’s striking honey bees nationwide, scientists at Agricultural Research Service (ARS) bee laboratories across the country are pooling their expertise. They want to learn what’s causing the disappearance of the honey bees that add about $15 billion a year to the value of U.S. crops by pollinating fruit, vegetable, tree nut and berry crops. Some beekeepers have already lost one-half to two-thirds of their colonies to CCD.

Regardless, this is a JOB CREATION project. New Jobs. New Paychecks. New Money in the economy. That’s what a stimulus bill is designed to do.

This earmark is a good example: Weslaco, Texas had in 2000 census 29,600 people. Median income $26,500. Do you think they might need some new jobs? YES! More on Honey Bee decline here. With $15 Billion in damage to ag each maybe we should pay attention.

#9 #475,000 for parking garage in Provo, Utah. Who’s going to build that parking garage? Day labor? Not hardly. This will employ everyone from designers, stress engineers, high iron workers, rebar producers not to mention the concrete being poured. JOB CREATION!

#8 $200,ooo in tattoo removal funds so gang bangers can leave their past behind. Senator McCain’s reaction is “REALLY?”.

Sorry, Senator, but since you didn’t grow up in a barrio or ghetto you wouldn’t know that those tat’s mark you for life and identify you as a gang member. That automatically marks you publicly for the oppo gang to take you out under certain circumstances.

At the very least, it makes it almost impossible to get a decent job, even if you’ve left the ‘Vato loco’ life behind and gotten a decent education.The man in this photo is trying to get into a tattoo removal program.

Even the Marine Corps will not allow visible tattoo’s. By not be able to afford tattoo removal, which isn’t cheap, fast or comfortable, they simply can’t pull themselves up by their bootstraps as so many advocate. Previous bad choices hold them back and lack of funds continue to hold them back.

This is an odd earmark obviously for a city or program that’s trying to get people back into society and the marketplace to earn decent money and fill jobs. It sounds odd, Senator, but it’s needed. Also, the tattoo removal has to be contracted to some doctor or set of doctors. Therefore, more money in the economy.

I imagine his primary objection to all this, and the seven left to come is that they were earmarked. An earmark only demands that the money allocated to the project can only be spent on that project. Now if it’s a bullshit set of projects that former Sen. Stevens in Alaska then ok…jump the bastard on the floor.

#7: $1 million for Morman cricket control in Utah, Senator McCain’s reaction: “Is this a species of cricket or a game played by the brits?”

Again just a little Google research would have found scientific articles about the problem. Here’s a good .pdf as an example.

The true likely objection is that these proposed earmarks aren’t debated I imagine. Yet can you envision the massive, unending and counter-productive log jam as every Senator debated every project in a nearly Trillion dollar bill?

Yes, Senator McCain, BS does sneak through. That’s a fact. But complaining about to job creation projects very likely highly needed in their towns isn’t the way to go.

Also Senator McCain, with respect, your staff should use Google more often and do a little research with the earmark sponsor. It would save you some time attacking generally viable, needed projects. It also might not embarrass you if anyone in the press, other than me does the slightest research on the balance of your Top Ten. Sorry, Sentor, with respect on this topic you are simply wrong.

Bookmark and Share

Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to Earmarks & John McCain’s Top 10…Excerpt

  1. Jenny Penny says:

    I live in the Rio Grande Valley, where Weslaco is a town very near me, I have friends that live there, and we all think this Honey Bee thing is quite dumb to say the least…We need real jobs like maquiladoras, not some stupid bee lab….The bee project is something that should be done, on local or state levels, not on a national level. Nationally, we should really worry about creating the massive amounts of jobs like in the manufacturing sector. If you don’t know that, then you are not doing your job… come on down here, not on your big private jet, but in your car and stay with the people and you’ll see that you are oh so WRONG!

  2. SBO says:

    Stu,

    The USMC does allow people with visible tattoos. Nice try, though.

  3. Jenny Penny: I’m sorry that you don’t understand my initial point. While you may want or even need a Mexican production plant (maquiladoras) the government on any level cannot invest money in Mexico based production plants.

    The Honey Bee plant will create jobs. Period. It is not a national program but funding for a state and local program. And if you think my ol ’91 Isuzu Trooper with 191,000 miles on it is a corporate jet well…sorry it doesn’t even have A/C and I live in the Southwest.

    The plant will create jobs. Period. Not the one’s you want. But jobs. and Maquiladoras are exported jobs even if you can commute across the border to get the pay.

    BTW: I grew up in the barrio. I know exactly what it’s like to not have enough cash to get though the month and needing a better job. I hope you have great success in finding such a job.

  4. SBO: You know I wanted to believe what you said but a gunny I was having a beer with the other night disagreed. He said policy wasn’t always followed but just try to enlist with full, half or quarter sleeved tats.

    So today I called the Marine Corps Recruiting office on Broadway Ave in Tucson AZ to ask the question.

    Answer: Full, half and quarter sleeves are NOT allowed and a recruit can’t have them. They have to be above the short shirt sleeve line. I asked a couple of time to be sure I had it right. I did.

    Sorry. But that was from a recruiter that has a quota to meet and I’m sure would love to enlist those guys. No tattoo’s below the sleeve line.

  5. Pingback: The Art of Propaganda and Tattoo Removal « david eubank on art

  6. SBO says:

    Stu,

    Wrong again. Look at the message 198/07.

    Marines are prohibited from:

    a. Tattoos or brands on the head and neck.

    b. Sleeve Tatoos. A sleeve tattoo is a very large tattoo, or a collection of smaller tattoos, that covers or almost covers a person’s entire arm or leg.

    c. Half-sleeve or quarter sleeve tattoos that are visible to the eye when wearing standard PT Gear (T-shirt and shorts). A half-sleeve or quarter-sleeve tattoo is defined as a very large tattoo or collection of smaller tattoos that covers, or almost covers the entire portion of an arm or leg above or below the elbow or knee.

    d. Tattoos or brands that are prejudicial to good order, discipline and morale, or are of a nature to bring discredit upon the Marine Corps. These may include, but are not limited to, any tattoo that is sexist, racist, vulgar, anti-american, anti-social, gang related, or extremest group or organization related.

    Marines who currently have a sleeve tattoo(s) prior to 1 April 2007, will be grandfathered. The Marine’s command will insert a photograph(s) of the respective (tattoo(s) along with a measurement(s) of the size in inches and of the location(s) on the body and the date the tattoo(s) was documented, on the Page 11 of the Marine’s SRB. The Marine will sign the Page 11 entry verifying the information is correct.

    So to clarify, a recruit may have visible visible tattoos, as long as it does not:

    Appear on the head or neck
    Constitutes a full, half or quarter “sleeve” (see above) which is visible with PT gear
    Breach standards of good conduct (see above)

    Stu, asking someone something is dangerous. You get incorrect interpretations. You published something that is factually incorrect. Shame on a USMC Gunnery Sergeant for not understanding the regulations, but shame on you for taking their word for it.

    I haven’t vetted your other articles, but I hope they don’t leave the same factual analysis to be desired.

  7. SBO

    If I am reading what you copy & pasted here correctly, it is you that is wrong. What you posted in your comment clearly states that:

    Marines are prohibited from:

    a. Tattoos or brands on the head and neck.

    b. Sleeve Tatoos. A sleeve tattoo is a very large tattoo, or a collection of smaller tattoos, that covers or almost covers a person’s entire arm or leg.

    c. Half-sleeve or quarter sleeve tattoos that are visible to the eye when wearing standard PT Gear (T-shirt and shorts). A half-sleeve or quarter-sleeve tattoo is defined as a very large tattoo or collection of smaller tattoos that covers, or almost covers the entire portion of an arm or leg above or below the elbow or knee.

    d. Tattoos or brands that are prejudicial to good order, discipline and morale, or are of a nature to bring discredit upon the Marine Corps.

    Furthermore, what you posted states that only “Marines who currently have a sleeve tattoo(s) prior to 1 April 2007, will be grandfathered.” Which means new recruits with sleeve tatoos would get turned down.

    See these links:
    Commandant’s message on tattoos

    Corps bans tattoo sleeves

    Perhaps you misunderstood what the fine print says, but Stuart does have it right.

  8. SBO says:

    Pam,

    It is you who is wrong. I am excerpting Stu’s comment:

    “Even the Marine Corps will not allow visible tattoo’s. By not be able to afford tattoo removal, which isn’t cheap, fast or comfortable, they simply can’t pull themselves up by their bootstraps as so many advocate. Previous bad choices hold them back and lack of funds continue to hold them back.”

    The Marine Corps DOES allow visible tattoos. A Marine can have a visible tattoo on an arm or leg. It just can’t be a “sleeve” tattoo. There is a BIG difference. One can have an Eagle, Globe and Anchor tatto on the forearm or leg, or a dragon, or an eagle, or whatever they want – just as long as it isn’t considered a sleeve or it isn’t racist, sexist, etc.

    Both you and Stu need to read the fine print, and publish accordingly.

  9. Thanks for sharing SBO.