1. Demonbeck says:

    Earmarks are one of the fundamental checks that the Legislative branch has on the Executive department.

    If our Senators and Congressman willingly give up their power to change the President’s budget, then some bureaucrat in Washington DC is going to be deciding what’s best for us here in Georgia.

    I am all for limiting the amount our elected officials can spend, but to take away earmarks is not the way to do it.

    Jack Kingston is doing the best job he can for the people of Georgia under the current system.

  2. I Am Jacks Post says:

    I knew Demonbeck would come on here and defend Kingston.

    “Under the current system?” I’d say Jeff Flake is doing a pretty good job of thumbing his nose at the “current system.” As is Sen. Coburn. And there is a growing number of others who’ve decided not stick their face in the trough.

    (It’s worth noting that Kingston routinely votes against ALL Flake amendments to approps bills).

    And you can’t be an appropriator and complain about the “current system”–appropriators are large part of the problem.

    Kingston does whatever the cardinals tell him do, as do other appropriators. The cardinals threaten non-approps members all the time–they threaten to pull their earmarks if they vote against the committee. And appropriators, including Kingston, always vote together to OPPOSE increased earmark disclosure and all other measures to intended to make earmarks less unsavory.

    Only Kingston and people who work/worked for Kingston would try to defend what the appropriators are doing.

  3. dingleberry says:

    Jack Kingston: Georgia’s Porker-in-Chief

    Sonny only wishes he could stack the bacon like Kingston.

    Kingston will be forever known as the “Baconater”…just like the Wendy’s burger.

  4. jm says:

    I’ve been following the Rep. Young (R. AK) debacle, which shows you exactly why earmarks are bad.

    Rep. Young has buddies in Florida construction. He gets them an earmark for an intersection in Florida. Florida refuses the money, wants to use it better. Young insists they support his pork. This isn’t even his state, he’s bringing construction dollars to a different state.


    I’m all for there being checks and balances, and logical use of funds, and not letting local gov’t waste big money from DC. But there’s got to be a better way. Earmarks are not being used to fix our aging infrastructure, they are being used as political footballs.

  5. Demonbeck says:

    Placing member names next to earmarks is fine. Getting rid of them altogether is a horrible, horrible idea and would severely restrict the power of the legislative branch.

  6. dingleberry says:

    Demonbeck is totally in favor of the baconater! He smokes cuban cigars with Kingston while they line the pockets of Savannah’s elite with my tax money! Bacon! Bacon! Bacon!

  7. Demonbeck says:

    You are completely correct, I want Jack in Washington getting projects to improve the lives of Georgians.

    BTW,Flake is the one smoking Cuban cigars my friend. Check out his previous stance on Cuba.

  8. dingleberry says:

    As long as Demonbeck and his friend Bacon Boy can smoke cuban cigars and line the pockets of Savannah developers, then Demonbeck has no problem robbing the nation’s taxpayers.

    I think it’s time we bring back the phrase “a Demonbeck conservative”. It means a conservative who is only conservative when his/her personal intererests aren’t involved.

    By the way, we need to lift the embargo on Cuba. That way, everyone, not just Demonbeck and his Porker-in-Chief friend can afford to enjoy the cigars.

  9. Demonbeck says:

    While dingleberry supports a strengthened Executive in the US, I continue to support the current balance of power as established by our founding fathers. I will not sit idly by and allow this country to take a step towards a monarchy – which is exactly what many in the “anti-earmark” crowd is calling for.

    I do not and will not ever believe that some bureaucrat in the OMB knows more about the needs of South Georgia than our very own elected officials.

    You go on thinking what you want and calling people names – whatever makes you sleep better at night dingleberry.

  10. dingleberry says:

    Wow, Demonbeck, that’s the biggest bunch of bulls*it I’ve ever heard, and I name myself after crap hanging from someone’s rear end.

    You don’t support anything remotely related to constitutional government. You’re just another big-government pork lovin’ Republican.

    You and Bacon Boy go on and line your own pockets. We’ll be watching.

  11. Demonbeck says:

    After you place the entire budget process in the hands of Washington bureaucrats, we’ll hear you talking about taking legislative votes from Congress because they only listen to the special interest groups.

    You’ll say, “They don’t represent the wishes of the people who elected them. They only listen to the special interest lobbyists who line their pockets and campaign war chests. We can’t trust them with their votes, so we should take that away from them.”

    And then your dream of a Constitutional monarchy will be complete – just in time for President Rodham.

  12. dingleberry says:

    What??? Are you an idiot? The entire budget process is ALREADY in the hands of Washington bureaucrats, like your friend BACON BOY JACK!

    If you really want the people to prosper in this state, then let them keep their damn money rather than putting it in the money-grubbing paws of Fat Jack and other pork-loving congressmen!

    It’s porkers like you and Jack who have screwed up enough that President Rodham will most likely be the result. Face it, you and other Demonbeck Conservatives have screwed the pooch for true limited government, constitutional conservatives.

    Porker-in-Chief Jack Kingston and his loyal bootlicker Demonbeck respectfully ask that you give them all your money so they can decide how to best spend it: i.e. line the pockets of Savannah developers and buy expensive Cuban Cigars.

    Smoke away, Bacon Boy and Bootlicker. Smoke away!

  13. Demonbeck says:

    Clearly you are unfamiliar with the federal budget process, dingleberry. Earmark reform will do nothing to stop the out-of-control spending in Washington. What we need are more stringent controls on the amounts spent by our elected officials up there.

    Earmark reform just means that the same amount of money that is currently being spent will go to the projects deemed necessary by the folks in OMB.

  14. dingleberry says:


    I have no idea? You’re the one who didn’t even realize that our money is already in the hands of Washington bureaucrats like your buddy, the porker-in-chief.

    What we need are more stringent controls on the amounts spent by our elected officials up there.


    Give it a rest Demonbeck, you can’t talk out both sides of your mouth. You can’t say we don’t need earmark reform and then say we need stringent controls on the amounts…without sounding like a complete idiot. You must be downloading your talking points straight off Jack Kingston’s website.

    I bet he whispers those sweet talking points into your eats while the two of you are smoking cuban cigars and lining the pockets of Savannah developers (a claim you have yet to deny).

    Get a life, Bacon Boy and Bootlicker!

  15. Demonbeck says:


    Yet again you are showing your naivete when it comes to the budget process.

    Let me help you out by clearing up a few misconceptions on your part. Hopefully, by leveling the playing field, you will be able to understand the points I am making.

    Earmark reform – while there are several different versions – earmark reform attempts to end the practice of Congress specifying appropriations for individual projects. It does not affect the levels at which the programs are funded. As a result, some nameless, faceless schmuck in OMB who doesn’t have to answer to voters, will be making decisions on how our taxpayer dollars are spent if earmark reform is passed.

    As to your definition of the term “bureaucrat” – which is also lacking…

    According to Webster’s a bureaucrat is defined as “a member of a bureaucracy.” Bureaucracy is defined as “a body of nonelective government officials/an administrative policy-making group.” Therefore, Kingston is NOT a bureaucrat.

    So yes, I CAN say that we should have more stringent controls on spending totals while arguing that earmarks are a necessary check that the legislative branch of our government has over the executive branch.

    I reiterate – taking away the Congress’s ability to decide how our nation’s taxpayer dollars are spent is equal to taking away their power to create laws.

  16. dingleberry says:


    Unglue your lips from Jack Kingston’s a$$ for a moment and hear me out:

    (1) Your buddy, Porker-in-Chief Jack Kingston, is a fraud. He claims to be a fiscal conservative, but is the biggest porker in the state of Georgia.

    (2) Your buddy, Porker-in-Chief Jack Kingston, is a bureaucrat. I’m surprised you had to break out the dictionary as a defense, Demonbeck. What Jack Kingston is (a pork-loving professional politician who has been in office too long) fits well within what most people view as a bureaucrat.

    (3) Most people would sh*t their pants if they knew Porker-Bureaucrat-in-Chief Jack Kingston was using their hard earned money to buy Cuban cigars for the two of you and using the money to line the pockets of Savannah developers (a claim you STILL have NOT denied).

    I reiterate- giving congress the ability to spend our tax dollars on projects not specifically enumerated as a responsibility of congress is tantamount to using the U.S. Constitution as sh*t paper.

    Keep on smoking with Bacon Boy Jack. At least you get yours, you and the other Demonbeck Conservatives out there.

  17. Demonbeck says:

    I have made my points dingleberry, if you refuse to listen to them I cannot help it. Feel free to continue living in ignorance.

  18. dingleberry says:

    I’d love to see a point. If one were actually made, I’d be glad to listen! The only thing I’ve heard from you is “Oh, Jack Kingston this, Jack Kingston that, Earmarks are Great, Pork is spectacular!”

    You still haven’t addressed my very valid point regarding Jack Kingston’s lining the pockets of Savannah Developers with tax money. You still haven’t addressed the Cuban Cigar issue. You still haven’t addressed the constitutional problem with pork that I brought up.

    So maybe you need to pull your head out of Jack Kingston’s a$$ for a little while and hear real points. Plus, when your head is all the way up there, your voice sounds muffled.

    Smoke away, bacon boy boot-licker!

Comments are closed.