3b079f13e1cd…

The House approved what could become the first override of a President Bush veto Tuesday, with Repub…

On November 6th, 2007 at 11:15 pm, feebiebabe said

Thx for the insight.

The dollar skid to a record low against the euro Wednesday in Asia on speculation that China may shift more of its foreign currency stockpiles — the world’s largest — into the European unit and away from the greenback. (from AP-Tokyo).

Wednesday Greetings Mrs. Malkin and loyal community. The above must be as a red light flashing that the USA is “maxing-out” on its national credit card. Entitlements, pork-barrel projects, foreign wars: the time shall soon be hard upon us when we must learn to pay for them out of current tax revenues. This means drastic change in the ways of Washington. Behold the weeping and gnashing of teeth come the next congress and administration, for the brutal indicators as above will come upon us not in simple arithmetic sequence, but exponentially, and the time for the fool’s world will be done.

Exactly! IMHO, the problem is much bigger than just the earmarks.

Unfortunately, earmarks are common practice with all of our representatives (Republicans and Democrats, alike). My problem is not so much with the “earmark” (some would say in certain circumstances they are a necessary evil) but rather that #1, Nancy has a legitimate conflict of interest here and that #2, Pelosi and Reid vowed in January to curb the egregious practice of earmarks by requiring representatives to file forms stating potential conflicts of interest in advance.

Her spokespeople were pretty quick to come out and dismiss any potential profits from said bill from being “speculative at best” being since her husbands properties were at least one mile away from the redevelopment areas benefiting from this bill.

In light of this statement, I would like to bring up that:

1- Nancy tried to pass a similar earmark for $20 million in July 0f 2005 (before she was elected Speaker of the House) but the bill died.
2- As Speaker of the House, your earmarks have a greater likelihood of passing because you have more political buying power
3- After this bill failed (July 2005) and before (and some could say in anticipation of his wife’s potential promotion) Paul Pelosi then increased his interest in these properties from $1 million to $5 million.
4- This waterfront redevelopment project will use tax payer dollars to revamp the downtown water district and thereby increasing the value of the surrounding properties.

Way to clean house Pelosi. Just another card carrying member of the EVIL Mary Poppins Club.

This has got to stop at some point. A billion here, a billion there and pretty soon you start talking about ‘real money’.