 Quote: |
Originally Posted by aMFliberal Quote: |
Originally Posted by Steven M Quote: |
Originally Posted by aMFliberal That's very well thought out Sgt. You provide sound evidence and ask the right questions, but is it really so shocking that these Congressmen attacked the budgets of other states instead of their own? | The reason the Congressmen didn't attack their own budgets was because (unlike all the rest) they did not have pet projects included in the massive highway bill. These politicians decided that it was better to risk dissatisfaction at home (by not bringing in the pork) than take money from the federal government just to fund some low-priority project.
I agree some of the projects were badly needed, but many of them were just to help the popularity of the congressmen who brought home the bacon. | Except their states are still receiving millions for the highway bill. They were trying to help out Louisiana by diverting the money from a project in Alaska to rebuilding a bridge in Louisiana. The point Sgt is making is that while trying to help out Louisiana isn't a bad thing, if it was their true priority than why did they not volunteer some of the billions of dollars that were going to there respective states of Arizona and Oklahoma. | What I meant was that Coburn and Flake did not take advantage of the add-ons they were offered. I'm not saying that they didn't receive any money from the bill itself.
I do agree with sgtdmski that they should have looked closer before criticizing the "bridge to nowhere." The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. ~Edmund Burke |