McCain raps Congress for bridge collapse

[RamboLiberal]

Source: MSNBC/AP

Republican John McCain said Saturday that Congress could share in the blame for the Minnesota bridge collapse because lawmakers diverted billions of dollars in transportation money from road work to pet projects.

"I think perhaps you can make the argument that part of the responsibility lies with the Congress of the United States," the Arizona senator said.

McCain said Congress spent roughly $20 billion on special-interest projects when it approved a new highway bill, signed into law by President Bush.

"We spent approximately $20 billion of that money on pork barrel, earmark projects," said McCain. "Maybe if we had done it right, maybe some of that money would have gone to inspect those bridges and other bridges around the country. Maybe the 200,000 people who cross that bridge every day would have been safer than spending $233 million of your tax dollars on a bridge in Alaska to an island with 50 people on it."



Read more: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20123417/

[Forkboy]

1. And maybe if you didn't support spending a frillion dollars a day in Iraq......

What a smeghead.

[OKIsItJustMe]

10. It's still a valid criticism

Money budgeted for "highways" was diverted to special projects, and he opposed it at the time.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8894520/

Bush signs $286.4 billion highway bill

Legislation includes funding for 6,371 pet projects; Alaska a big winner

The Associated Press
Updated: 8:31 p.m. ET Aug 10, 2005

...

But Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., one of four senators who opposed the bill, said the estimated $24 billion lawmakers directed to special projects was "egregious." He has cited dozens of what he calls "interesting" projects. His favorite: $2.3 million for landscaping along the Ronald Reagan Freeway in California.

"I wonder what Ronald Reagan would say?" McCain asked about the fiscally conservative president.

If McCain was one of 4 senators to vote against it, how many Democrats voted for it?

McCain has a long history of criticizing "earmarks."

Give the devil his due.

[iamjoy]

13. McCain Hates "Pork" - True

However, I must wonder if there had been an earmark to replace this deficient bridge, would McCain have recognized the need or opposed it?

If there wasn't an earmark, why not? Why didn't one of Minnesota's senators or representative speak up? And if they did, what happened to their request?

[Archae]

2. And how much pork went to YOUR state, Saint McCain?

Damn hypocrite...

[Spiffarino]

3. He's just now saying this?

Somebody should tell Alzheimer's Johnny that the infamous "Bridge to Nowhere" was given us by Senator Ted Stevens back when the Publicans still ran the government...and John McCain was right there when the bill was put together!

What a moran.

[RC]

4. Gee, ya think all that money spent in Iraq may have something

to do with that bridge collapse? To say nothin of the less taxes idiots that support the killing over there. Huh, ya think, huh? :banghead:

[rooboy]

5. Another Republican with 20/20 hindsight...

like Pat Robertson, always manages predicts the disasters after they happen

[Endangered Specie]

6. Hey John, that bridge outlasted your campaign...

so don't be jealous.

[tabasco]

7. Yep, the Democrats should have fixed all the republican fuckups already.

It's only been six months but McCain is screeching that the Democrats should have fixed all of the republican disasters already. Patience, Johnnie Boy, you guys really ran the country into the ground and it's going to take a lot longer than six months to fix YOUR fuckups.

[Fovea]

8. John McCain, amnesiac

As if his anti tax rhetoric wasn't part of the problem. And the pro war rhetoric is the other part...


I read this drivel, and realize that we are going under. I worry quite a bit about the big falling apart.
This is the truth as I see it. DC3's are still flying because they were not made efficient, but safe.
Modern airliners have been known to fall apart after a minor fusilage failure... why?
Because they were over engineered to be as light and strong as possible. The materials were at the bleeding edge of efficiency. When they fail, they fail more catastrophically because they are performing at a higher load due to their very high efficiency.

The DC-3 with its twin prop engines, and gazillion rivets, not so much. THey were designed with a slide rule.
But they continue to fly. We have worshipped efficiency in labor, shipping, manufacture, and so on to the point where I worry that the system will no longer be robust. I think of this every time I hear about how efficient our workers are.


What factors were most important for the builders and designers of that bridge?
I would bet that long service life was not one factor. After all, where is the profit in that?
These bridges are not engineered to last, and when it is time to replace them, you bloody well better get about it.
What were we doing for the past six years? Terra Terra Terra Terra...Which is to say, attempting to steal Iraq in a plausible way.

BIG HINT FOR McCain--

If you hadn't put your knee pads on for every tax bashing policy for the last 20 years or so,
we would not be falling apart. Don't blame the bicyclists for the sins of the SUV generation.

You were all for free trade when it only meant a rush to the bottom for wages and product costs.
But you forgot what the bottom looks like, or you never knew, like your special friend George. At the bottom, profit is more important than life, and bribery is more important than law.

At the bottom, the Padrones *tell* you what you are going to believe, and be frightened of. Like your boss, Karl Rove.

[YDogg]

9. Who's this McCain fellow, and why should I care what he says?

:shrug:

[trof]

11. $.04/gal. gas tax bill killed (veto threat) in 2004.

The Republicans have no problem rubber-stamping $144 billion a year into a failed war in Iraq and Afghanistan without demanding results. But if we committed that same $12 billion a month out of a $2 trillion federal budget, and paid for it with a gas tax increase, we could address our infrastructure needs by the end of the next president’s first term. And we would create millions of good paying jobs at the same time and do our economy a world of good, especially if we married it to a redirection of oil and gas subsidies and a gas tax increase towards development of a domestic, sustainable energy industry.

But for the sake of four cents a gallon back in 2004, the Bush Administration said no additional money would be provided for roads and bridges. Yet we pour billions of borrowed money into Iraq every month.

When a bipartisan majority in Congress suggested increasing the federal excise tax on gasoline back in 2004 for the first time since 1993 to pay for road and bridge projects, the White House threatened to veto the measure because it contained a tax increase. At the time, the White House said they would not support any increase in federal gas taxes to pay for road improvements, and then said that highway needs must be met solely through the existing, woeful level of funding in the highway fund and not the general fund, a position that by all accounts within Congress and among transportation experts shortchanged our true needs to the tune of several hundred billion dollars.

But the White House says "let's not politicize this", like they did to cover up their negligence after Katrina.
http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/010765.php

[cboy4]

12. Guess who's not going to be happy about the bridge to nowhere comment!!

LOL!