earmarks are good?

one more thing. you know how all the politicians like to talk about earmarks and how bad they are? how they mess up the budget because everyone congress has to send a fat piece of pie to a pet project, and then a big chunk of that earmarked money gets spent lobbying for more money the next year, and there's not enough moeny in the budget for the things that really matter? yeah, and how bush made a big deal about striking them from the budget he sent to congress this year? but really, what's the point of spending all that time, money, and energy to get elected and go to washington and get yourself on the senate appropriations committee if you're not going to be able to give out money when it suits you? i don't see how it can be helped.

anyway, tonight i was at a university event with some senators and representatives from the university's home state. everybody (lawmakers and university officials) was gloating about an earmark to start a New Research Institute - one that studies, in part, a religious-right-friendly version of the forefront of medical research: the somewhat less promising "adult stem cells". it was just interesting to hear earmarks spoken about in happy and unabashed terms. plus, i got to tell a joke and said "goddamn" to the university president. that part was pretty cool.