Brian Doherty | March 21, 2007
While the prez has fulminated against "earmarks," in his State of the Union address and elsewhere, the D.C. Examiner's Mark Tapscott thinks that Bush is going to let the whole earmarks "anonymous spending unrelated to a bill's ostensible purpose slipped in behind closed doors" thing ride when it comes to his Iraq supplemental bill.
Reason needs your support. Please donate today!
Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.
(310) 367-6109
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment or disable your ability to comment for any reason at any time.
|3.21.07 @ 10:48AM|#
And this is noteworthy why?? Of course he'd allow anything as long as it, in some way or another, supports his war.
Guy Montag|3.25.07 @ 7:03AM|#
Looks like the writer's suspicions prooved false.