Compare:
Democrats “should not seek to use pork to buy a majority for an unconditional retreat that the majority does not support.”
(Washington Post editorial, 3/23/07)
Contrast:
MR. RUSSERT: “But in that bill was $20 billion of so-called pork, money for cricket infestation, tours of the Capitol, security at the National Convention, peanut crops. Why would the Democrats put that kind of money in such a serious bill?”
REP. CHARLES B. RANGEL (D-NY): “Because they needed the votes.”
(NBC’s “Meet the Press,” 4/1/07)
Somebody ought to get around to connecting
these dots...
