Typical Clinton Opacity

So, Obama has just released — for the *second* time — a list of his “earmarks,” i.e., those pet projects for local Illinois entities for which he sought funding. Earmarks are typically derided as pork barrel spending, although I don’t get that. Sure, if there’s a conflict of interest when seeking an earmark, that ain’t good. But otherwise, why shouldn’t our tax dollars be used to support hospitals, universities, etc.? Not to excess, but that strikes me as a better way to spend it than on, say, a rat hole out in the desert’s of the Middle East.

But whether good or ill, Obama has released his entire list, and explained any items that look questionable. He’s encouraged Hillary to do the same. She hasn’t. And I’m guessing she probably won’t. So typical of the Clintons. It’s rarely the facts that will cause political problems, but rather the attempts to prevent those facts from being made public. The Clintons — and I do hate bashing them, because I was and remain a huge supporter of Bill’s, and I’m happy to have Hillary in the Senate, but I gotta call ’em as I see ’em — are just reflexively secretive. Even when it doesn’t really matter, and even when they’re ultimately going to have to be forthcoming, so they might as well just bite the bullet and get it over with. This is one of the primary reasons why I’m not supporting her. Let’s have a president who’s a bit more forthcoming.

Will Florida and Michigan Please Sit Down and Shut Up?

Well isn’t this interesting. So first Florida IGNORES many many warnings from the DNC regarding its relocation of the Democratic Primary date, and now wants to piss and moan about not being represented at the Democratic Convention? Wha? When the DNC privately contacts each member of the Florida House and tells them, “we strongly urge you to oppose the measure that would move your primary because we will NOT be able to seat ANY of your delegates should you approve this,” the House ignores them?

The PDF document brings up a good point — isn’t the DNC entitled to choose its candidate in any way it sees fit to do so? Cries of disenfranchisement from Michigan and Florida don’t really enter into it. This isn’t a general election, it’s a party selection process. Is there equal protection mandated under a party’s selection process?

And now, Florida says, “Our House delegation is opposed to a mail-in campaign or any redo of any kind.” Apparently they want to seat the delegates as initially apportioned. How convenient for Hillary.

I think if they’re opposed to any do-over (probably partially because they don’t want to pay for one), we teach these jerks a lesson. Sit down and shut up, Florida. You had your say in 2000 and you messed it up for all of us. You want everything YOUR way? Too bad. Sit down, and shut up.

The Wily Ways of Washington

From today’s NYT: Former Attorney General John Ashcroft responded angrily Tuesday to Congressional Democrats who suggested that a no-bid private contract directed to him by the Justice Department last year amounted to a “back-room sweetheart deal” worth tens of millions of dollars to his consulting firm.

“There is not a conflict; there is not an appearance of a conflict,” Mr. Ashcroft said at a hearing of a House Judiciary subcommittee exploring the circumstances of the contract.

I love this. The administration is up in arms over the Air Force’s granting a contract in a fair, arms length, contracting bidding process, to Airbus, because it’s not an American company. And yet they’re happy to give no-bid sweetheart deals to their cronies. We can’t shed these guys soon enough.

A Fabulous Time

George W. Bush stood in front of the press today to officially introduce the Republican Nominee for president, John McCain. Apart from entirely hogging the spotlight, he noted, “I’ve had my time in the Oval Office, and it’s been a fabulous experience, by the way.”

Not for us, Mr. Bush. Not for us.