- Status
G
gnjsdad
Guest
You should be cheering; giving Congressman Murtha an attaboy.
M
MelanieAnne
Guest
Murtha is so corrupt it shouldn’t even be a matter for discussion. Attaboy? The right phrase should have been “shame on him!”
And here I had this silly fantasy that some people were reasonable. Silly me.
And here I had this silly fantasy that some people were reasonable. Silly me.
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
Which underscores a point I’ve made before, it we don’t have enough money to do everything that needs to be done in tihs country, it isn’t because we’re under-taxed. It’s because Congress squanders the money.
S
system
Guest
I can’t belive an ex-marine would asking for more money for the troops! 
Funniest line:
most dissapointing line is from this thread:
Funniest line:
Yes people everywhere are calling him that!
most dissapointing line is from this thread:
Casting aspersions or outright calumny doesn’t help anyone. Is there a case against him? An ongoing investigation? Is there any backup at all to that castaway remark?
M
MelanieAnne
Guest
Yes there is. But I’m not here to do your homework for you.
S
system
Guest
Way to go - you’ve managed to take cheap shots at Murtha, Gnjsdad, and me
And it’s still early! What a Catholic!
M
MelanieAnne
Guest
That’s your opinion. I didn’t take a cheap shot at anyone. That Murtha is corrupt is fairly well known.
G
gilliam
Guest
Max,
Earmarks are things congressmen want, usually government contracts for friends in their district, that the military didn’t ask for. In other words, pork. Murtha is the “darling of the defense industry” because he can get them contracts that otherwise they would not get, because there is no need for them. Bottom line: this has little to do with the troops and everything to do with his friends in the defense business.
R
rlg94086
Guest
Why?
G
gnjsdad
Guest
Interesting. Why is Murtha (and Murtha alone) corrupt? The story mentions a few from both parties.
From the article…
Murtha: 48 earmarks; $150 million.
On the other hand:
Rep. Bill Young (R-Fla): 52 earmarks; $117.2 million.
Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-Calif): $95 million in earmarks
Rep. Jack Kingston (R-Ga) $55 million
Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif) $19 million in earmarks
And let’s not let the Democrats off the hook here.
Rep. Norman Dicks (D-Wash) $44 million in earmarks.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif): 11 projects; $37.3 million
Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-Md): $26 million
Which of these others do you call corrupt? Only the Democrats?
Since Duncan Hunter is a Presidential candidate, maybe you’d like to offer your opinion on his corruption problem.
Murtha is a former troop. Looks like he’s doing the best of all to “support the troops”. To call a former troop corrupt without basis is an insult to a man doing more to “support the troops’” than any of these other guys.
My dear MelanieAnne, I am the embodiment of reasonable. In fact, if you look at the definition in the dictionary, there’s a picture of me right over the word.
G
gnjsdad
Guest
But without Murtha and his friends in the defense business, how would the troops get the support they need in Iraq?
Will the Pentagon tell Murtha to take his $150 million someplace else?
They don’t need his $150 million? But they’ll take the $117 million that Bill Young has to offer, and the $19 million from Duncan Hunter?
I’m afraid your antipathy for Jack Murtha is clouding your judgement.
.
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
And you’ve just illustrated the problem – when everyone is guilty, no one is guilty. So the pork goes on and on.
That’s why we need a Line Item Veto in the Constitution, so we can hold one man – the President – responsible for gross overspending.
G
gnjsdad
Guest
Because by his actions, he’s supporting the troops. Isn’t that what everyone here wants?Why?
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
The same way they got it before Murtha was born – through the normal appropriations process.
The $150 million isn’t going to the Pentagon. The Pentagon never asked for it. It’s going to contractors as a bribe to build some facilities or establish offices in Murtha’s home district.
I repeat, the money isn’t going to the Pentagon. They didn’t ask for it. It’s going to contractors in return for them doing something in the congressmen’s home district.
This practice detracts from support of the troops – hundreds of millions are being spent above and beyond the amount needed to support the troops – we could buy or contract for whatever we need without these huge helpings of pork.
M
MelanieAnne
Guest
I believe you are reasonable. My comment was about Congress.My dear MelanieAnne, I am the embodiment of reasonable. In fact, if you look at the definition in the dictionary, there’s a picture of me right over the word.
I don’t agree that Murtha is a troop supporter and from what I understand, the troops feel the same way.
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
No, he’s not. He and all the other congressmen listed are stealing from the troops. Those figures represent bribes, and the bribes add to the cost of supporting the troops.
M
MelanieAnne
Guest
Earmarks/pork are essentially legalized bribery. Congressmen get special appropriations for companies in their home districts. In turn, companies in their home districts make campaign contributions to the congressman. One big money merry-go-round paid for by the already over-taxed taxpayers. It’s corrupt, it’s immoral and it’s wrong. and unfortunately it goes on all the time.
R
rlg94086
Guest
Where is the evidence that his earmarks support the troops?
A
Al_Masetti
Guest
Here are a few things to check out about Murtha …
… if he had been a Republican, he would have been forced to resign …
… unindicted co-conspirator under the Abscam investigation.
… wanted to redeploy U.S. troops … from Iraq … to Okinawa.
… if he had been a Republican, he would have been forced to resign …
… unindicted co-conspirator under the Abscam investigation.
… wanted to redeploy U.S. troops … from Iraq … to Okinawa.
- Status