Quote:
Originally Posted by kutulu
I think it is asinine how McCain/Palin make such a big deal about earmarks. Total earmark spending accounts for about 0.5% of the total federal budget. Ending earmarks would have almost no measurable impact on federal spending. It is useless grandstanding.
|
I am in a giving mood. The reason why I read publications like the WSJ is to get an edge, I want to "win". Others who read the publication want to "win" as well. Same with publications like IBD. Earmarks are not an important issue to me, but having people in political power who want to minimize government involvement in my life is. McCain highlighting earmarks is simply McCain telling me that he gets it, and will do what he can when he gets in the White House. We know McCain wants to "win", we know that he can not "win" on a libertarian message. Then if the opposition calls McCain on the issue, the opposition fall into a trap, sort of like a gambit opening in chess. McCain knows the issue is somewhat trivial and knows that, for example Gov. Palin is from a state that benefits from earmarks, but in engaging on this issue McCain takes control over the debate. Control of the debate will lead to victory.
Again, I ask - does Obama really want to take the bait on this issue and make it front and center in the news cycle, in the debates, etc. I would think not.
{added} Do you see how different my view on this is from Host's view? McCain needs people like me to get interested in his candidacy so he can "win". That is why he picked Palin, and it has worked. a month ago, I felt Obama was going to win by 10 to 15%, now I am not so sure.