Javascript Menu by Deluxe-Menu.com Campaign News: Matt Damon on Sarah Palin, Candidate Hugs, and are Earmarks really so bad? | WDEF News 12 | News, Weather and Sports for Chattanooga and the Tennessee Valley
Sky Cam Incline Weather Cam Traffic Tracker Bonus Video Local Forecast Local Webcast

Campaign News: Matt Damon on Sarah Palin, Candidate Hugs, and are Earmarks really so bad?

Collins Parker's picture
Comments Below: 4

Just some random thoughts on the Presidential Campaign.

We'll start with the lighter stuff and work our way to the heavier issue.

Sexual Politics

 Just how affectionate can running mates be if one is a man and the other is a woman?

Do you shake hands, hug, or even give a ceremonial kiss?

And how does your spouse handle it?

The Early Show compares the McCain/Palin hug to other mixed political marriages.

Hugging Running Mates


Damon Blasts Palin

Democrats have struggled mightily on how to tackle the Palin Problem. 

She's an instant hit with a lot of voters.

But how can you attack her?

And more importantly, who can attack her?

Hillary has already turned down the job.

 I doubt many people thought that Actor Matt Damon would step up to the plate.

But he did in very plain terms, calling her selection "a bad Disney movie."

Here are his full remarks.

Matt Damon on Sarah Palin


Fighting Earmarks

A key selling point right now for the McCain/Palin team is bringing real change to Washington.


During his acceptance speech at the convention Senator McCain promised to fight the practice of Earmarks.  And he promised to let us know which lawmakers used them.

Well, that might be embarrassing for some Republicans in our area.

An Earmark is a detour around the budgetary process.

A member of Congress uses it to pay for a pet project without it going through the budget machine.

Senator McCain has a sterling record on them.

He's the rare representative that doesn't use them.

Even the loudest tax-cutting, program slashing, right-wingers use Earmarks at some point.

The question is, while banning Earmarks might be good for America, is it good for Arizona?  or Tennessee?

Lets look at how they've been used in our area in this year's federal budget, according to the OMB.

 -- Chickamauga Lock Earmark:  Senators Lamar Alexander & Bob Corker set aside $1,055,000 for the lock project in Chattanooga.  The Bush Administration has resisted putting it in their budget.

-- Chattanooga Airtanker base:  Senator Alexander & Rep. Zach Wamp spend $694,000 on the airtanker base for the Cherokee National Forest

-- Land Acquistion: Sen. Alexander spends $3,052,000 for buying land for the Cherokee National Forest

-- Dental Hygiene program:  Rep. John Duncan spends $383,000 to establish the program at Hiwasse College.

-- UTC Study: Rep. Wamp spends $383,000 for a study at UTC on low birth weight

-- Center for Entrepreneurial Growth:  Rep. Wamp spent $98,000 to build the Center in Hamilton County.

-- Manufacturing Training:  Sen. Alexander and Rep. Wamp spent $814,000 on the training activities  in Hamilton County.

 -- Airport Taxiway: Rep. Wamp earmarks $1,960,000 to relocate the taxiway at Lovell Field.

-- Parking Facility: Rep. Wamp spent $588,000 on Carta's north shore shuttle parking and terminal facility.

-- Enterprise Center :  Rep. Wamp spends $600,000 for the Enterprise Center Office of Technology Transfer Project

-- Entrepreneurial Growth:  Sen. Alexander designates $200,000 for Hamilton County.

-- Riverbank stabilization: Rep. Wamp spends $1,969,000 to protect riverfront property on Moccassin Bend for the National Park

-- Highway project:  Rep. Deal spends $147,000 for improvements to State Road 151 & Colbert Hollow Road in Catoosa County.

-- Carter's Lake and Dam: A non-sponsored earmark for $6,887,000 for work on the Murray County lake.

So how do our lawmakers rank for special project spending?

Citizens Against Government Waste ranks every member of Congress for Pork Barrel spending.

Here is how your Senators (and a few choice others) ranked (1-100)

1.    Thad Cochran (R-MS) $892,200,000

2.    Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) $469,400,000 (now under indictment)

3.    Richard Shelby (R-Alabama) $458,500,000

56.  Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) $128,000,000

60.  Lamar Alexander (R-TN) $120,000,000

64.  Johnny Isakson (R-GA) $119,700,000

70.  Barack Obama (D-IL) $97,400,000

89.  Bob Corker (R-TN) $33,900,000

100. John McCain (R-AZ) $0 (1 of 4 senators with no pork money)

On the House side, Rep. Zach Wamp easily leads local lawmakers (out of 435 members).

61.    Zach Wamp (R-TN) $53,800,000

151.  Heath Shuler (D-NC) $28,800,000

273.  John Duncan (R-TN) $15,900,000

353.  Lincoln Davis (D-TN) $8,500,000

355.  Nathan Deal (R-GA)  $8,400,000

So what's my point with all these numbers?

--  I hate hypocrisy in politics.

Don't cry about Washington spending and then rake in all you can back home.

--  McCain is pure on this issue

He really is the outsider here (just look at some of those fat-cat big spending Republicans from down South).

--  But are earmarks really that bad? 

What some call pork, others call investment.  Would Chattanooga have landed the Volkswagen plant or kept the River open to industry without those earmarks?  As a north Georgian,  is Nathan Deal protecting my wallet, or failing to bring home my share of federal dollars?  That question is one each of you have to answer for yourself.  Just look deeper than the campaign slogans.


To Kdog and Zeb

With all due respect, my issue is not with abortion. Abortion isn't going to make the economy better. Actually the fact that McCain and Palin would rather have women who have been raped by sexual predators, or forced to have sex with their brothers and fathers, to not allow an abortion is an abomination.

But, back to my main point. I am an undecided voter. I was going for McCain despite the abortion issue but when he chose Palin, I was appalled. He could have picked anyone with more experience but he had to pick someone for popular/celebrity reasons to boost his campaign. He could have picked older, more experienced women (since it is obvious he is aiming for female voters) rather than her.

I have to look at this realistically, McCain has a good chance of not surviving his first term if he is elected. Palin is not knowledgeable on key issues that America needs to become a superpower again. I want my kids to live in a country without a trillion dollar debt. The place has become increasingly global with the internet, and phone communication. It is unheard of to have someone become next in line for a presidency without the experience.

Palin noted that she had foreign experience because Russia was near Alaska and that she condemns Russia for its attacks on Georgia, and that "perhaps" they should go to war against Russia. This is what made me swerve away from McCain. It isn't as simple as lets attack Russia because they are doing this. It is one thing to send troops to the Middle East and another to Russia. It would be at a greater cost of life if we were to go to Russia.

Thus, I respectfully withdraw my ticket to McCain.

Sources: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-palin12-2008sep12,0,3693136.story

PS
Zeb please list your source. Your comment, "Most would say at birth. Mr. Obama was the ONLY senator who voted that infants who survive an abortion, should be killed. For those children, according to Mr. Obama, have no rights." has NO factual evidence to back it up.
As a Republican not voting for the Republican ticket, I think we Republicans have done enough damage in lies and smearing of words. Please be true in heart and mind, ""Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour" (Exodus 20:16, the eighth Commandment)."


Matt Damon

I have to ask: Do people really care what an actor has to say about anything important like a politics. What makes actors political experts to begin with? I could care less what he thinks about any topic. So why does the press care... slow news day or what.

MRR


Obama on a social issue - Rights or No Rights?

This comment is not about pro-choice, pro-life as pertains to abortion.

It is a comment about when children born in the USA acquire the rights and protections of the Constitution.

Most would say at birth. Mr. Obama was the ONLY senator who voted that infants who survive an abortion, should be killed. For those children, according to Mr. Obama, have no rights.

If Mr. Obama can say this about the young, he can also say the same about the old, infirm who have run out of private insurance money to pay their medical bills. They too, under this logic, can be killed, as members not contributing to society.

Do those who support Mr. Obama agree with this policy and can they just close their eyes to such and vote for him anyway? If so, the country is worse off than most would think.


Interesting... I have heard

Interesting... I have heard several TV shows that have placed Obama and Biden as two of the top wasteful spenders.... and they were reputable sources.

McCain consistently ranks as the most frugal.


Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Images can be added to this post.
More information about formatting options

AP News Video

Recent comments