Stephen Moore has a depressing column in today’s WSJ on the big-government Republicans:
Both political parties are now willing and eager to spend tax dollars as if they were passing out goody-bags to grabby four-year-olds at a birthday party. The Democrats are already forging their 2006 and 2008 message: We will spend just as many trillions of dollars as Republicans, but we will spend them better than they do. After witnessing the first few Republican misappropriations for Hurricane Katrina, the Democrats may very well be right.
With enemies like Chuck, who needs amigos? Whatever happened to the party’s fearsome forensic skills at “the politics of personal destruction”? Granted, blathering on about how, if the other guy doesn’t agree with your views, he must be deficient in “compassion and humanity” is a lot of baloney even by mawkish Dem standards. But, if you’re going to twitter about the fullness of somebody’s heart, why get Chuck Schumer to play Senator Oprah? He has the shifty air of a mob accountant, even with every intern on his staff holding onions under his eyes. Likewise, sneering at Roberts’ life of privilege may be a smart move, but not if you entrust it to Dianne Feinstein, one of the wealthiest women in the galaxy.
The corruption at the UN is even more wide spread than most imagined (though I’m not surprised at all):
Procurement and budgeting corruption may escape Volcker’s scrutiny, but they are central to the mandate of Annan.
This scandal touches on almost everything the secretary-general is supposed to control. It is by way of procurement contracts, for goods and services ranging from cappuccino and paper clips at U.N. headquarters, to air freight services and food rations for peacekeeping troops worldwide, that the United Nations spends the billions contributed every year by member states
The corruption at the UN is even more wide spread than most imagined (though I’m not surprised at all):
Procurement and budgeting corruption may escape Volcker’s scrutiny, but they are central to the mandate of Annan.
This scandal touches on almost everything the secretary-general is supposed to control. It is by way of procurement contracts, for goods and services ranging from cappuccino and paper clips at U.N. headquarters, to air freight services and food rations for peacekeeping troops worldwide, that the United Nations spends the billions contributed every year by member states
The corruption at the UN is even more wide spread than most imagined (though I’m not surprised at all):
Procurement and budgeting corruption may escape Volcker’s scrutiny, but they are central to the mandate of Annan.
This scandal touches on almost everything the secretary-general is supposed to control. It is by way of procurement contracts, for goods and services ranging from cappuccino and paper clips at U.N. headquarters, to air freight services and food rations for peacekeeping troops worldwide, that the United Nations spends the billions contributed every year by member states
Tim Cavanaugh knows where to find the money to rebuild southeast Louisiana:
Nobody, however, made out on the highway bill quite like the state of Alaska and its ravenous political class. Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska), chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, bragged to his constituents that the transportation bill (which Young loves so much he named it after his wife) was “stuffed like a turkey” with handouts for his state, and he was not exaggerating. The $721 million in tundra spending includes: a $2 23 million “bridge to “nowhere,” connecting the 8,900-person town of Ketchikan to an airport on Gravina Island, whose population is 50; a $200 million bridge connecting Anchorage to a rural port so insignificant even the Anchorage Chamber of Commerce tried to block the project; and $15 million in seed money for a 68-mile, $284 million access road to Juneau. (This last one is opposed by not only the Environmental Protection Agency but a majority of the area’s residents.)