Comments on: Noble: Let’s Have Perpetual War, But No Earmarks, Please http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/2010/02/22/noble-lets-have-perpetual-war-but-no-earmarks-please/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=noble-lets-have-perpetual-war-but-no-earmarks-please n. the principle of good order<br /><br /> "Observe the strange inversion of all order and sense! Dignity debased; how vilely is the function of a consul prostituted!" ~The Craftsman Fri, 10 Feb 2012 02:25:26 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Garland http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/2010/02/22/noble-lets-have-perpetual-war-but-no-earmarks-please/comment-page-1/#comment-35545 Garland Fri, 26 Feb 2010 22:11:54 +0000 http://www.amconmag.com/larison/?p=10792#comment-35545 Yeah, both comments on earmarks here are right on. I can't believe how bad Noble's argument is. "Incoherent" is sort of being polite about it. I mean, he doesnt seem to know what an earmark is. Yeah, both comments on earmarks here are right on. I can’t believe how bad Noble’s argument is. “Incoherent” is sort of being polite about it. I mean, he doesnt seem to know what an earmark is.

]]> By: Norwegian Shooter http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/2010/02/22/noble-lets-have-perpetual-war-but-no-earmarks-please/comment-page-1/#comment-35489 Norwegian Shooter Tue, 23 Feb 2010 05:06:11 +0000 http://www.amconmag.com/larison/?p=10792#comment-35489 Also laughable is the "gateway drug" BS. Earmarks came before and lead directly to huge government spending - really? Even accepting the premise of this throw-away line, the implication is that we should get the heroine addict to stop smoking dope. Yeah, that will help. Also laughable is the “gateway drug” BS. Earmarks came before and lead directly to huge government spending – really? Even accepting the premise of this throw-away line, the implication is that we should get the heroine addict to stop smoking dope. Yeah, that will help.

]]> By: MBunge http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/2010/02/22/noble-lets-have-perpetual-war-but-no-earmarks-please/comment-page-1/#comment-35471 MBunge Mon, 22 Feb 2010 21:14:30 +0000 http://www.amconmag.com/larison/?p=10792#comment-35471 Do people like Noble actually not understand that earmarks don't increase federal spending by a single dime? Or am I the stupid one, because it was my understanding that earmarks simply designate where federal dollars will be spent? A $500,000 dollar earmark doesn't spend an additional $500,000, it takes away the right of other agencies/authorities to decide where that $500,000 will be spent. I suppose if Congressmen couldn't earmark, it might make them marginally more inclined to reduce spending but that's a dubious causality as best. Mike Do people like Noble actually not understand that earmarks don’t increase federal spending by a single dime? Or am I the stupid one, because it was my understanding that earmarks simply designate where federal dollars will be spent? A $500,000 dollar earmark doesn’t spend an additional $500,000, it takes away the right of other agencies/authorities to decide where that $500,000 will be spent.

I suppose if Congressmen couldn’t earmark, it might make them marginally more inclined to reduce spending but that’s a dubious causality as best.

Mike

]]> By: Mike W http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/2010/02/22/noble-lets-have-perpetual-war-but-no-earmarks-please/comment-page-1/#comment-35466 Mike W Mon, 22 Feb 2010 17:53:58 +0000 http://www.amconmag.com/larison/?p=10792#comment-35466 It seems Noble's only case against Paul is that Paul can't win a national election. I find these anecdotal tales of apologetic reasoning hard to take. It seems Noble’s only case against Paul is that Paul can’t win a national election. I find these anecdotal tales of apologetic reasoning hard to take.

]]>