During CNN debate, John King falsely claimed Obama "refused" to disclose earmarks
SUMMARY: During the February 21 Democratic presidential debate, CNN's John King cited a report stating that Sen. Barack Obama was "responsible for $91 million in earmarks" in the 2008 fiscal year, and asked Obama: "And you have refused to say where the money went, what it's for. Why?" In fact, Obama disclosed his "earmarks" for the 2008 fiscal year in a June 2007 press release.
During the February 21 CNN Democratic presidential debate, CNN senior national correspondent John King cited a recent Taxpayers for Common Sense report in noting that Sen. Barack Obama was "responsible for $91 million in earmarks" in the 2008 fiscal year, and asked Obama: "And you have refused to say where the money went, what it's for. Why?" In fact, Obama disclosed his "earmarks" for the 2008 fiscal year in a June 2007 press release titled "Obama Announces FY08 Federal Funding Requests." Indeed, Obama responded to King's question by saying: "No, that's not true. We've actually disclosed, John, all our earmarks. And so, you know, we'll be happy to provide you with that information, because I believe very strongly in transparency."
According to data compiled by Taxpayers for Common Sense, Obama secured $91,421,220 in "earmarks" in the 2008 fiscal year. Taxpayers for Common Sense defined "earmarks" as "legislative provisions that set aside funds within an account for a specific program, project, activity, institution, or location. These measures normally circumvent merit-based or competitive allocation processes and appear in spending, authorization, tax, and tariff bills."
From the February 21 CNN Democratic presidential debate:
KING: Both of you have been harshly critical of the Bush administration for its secrecy, what you consider overuse of secrecy and executive power. Tonight, Senator Obama, you've talked about more transparency. You also at one point criticized earmarks.
And yet, a recent report came out that identified you -- lower on the list in terms how much money senators seek and sneak into the budget for these pork-barrel spending projects, but it still said you were responsible for $91 million in earmarks. And you have refused to say where the money went, what it's for. Why?
OBAMA: No, that's not true. We've actually disclosed, John, all our earmarks. And so, you know, we'll be happy to provide you with that information, because I believe very strongly in transparency.
Simply put, the advent of the 24-hour news cycle has turned journalists into sensationalist morons.
Cable news has transformed the media into the news equivalent of fast food. Mass produced, mass marketed, highly profitable, full of crap, yet irresistible to people who don't know better or simply don't care what they ingest.
King made it up.
That shouldn't surprise you. Most of the cable coverage of the Times/McCain story this week made up what was actually in the Times story.
CNN HIT PEOPLE THAT NIGHT TO MAKE OBAMA LOOK BAD AND MCCAIN LOOK GOOD WAS KING AND BROWN. CNN GOES OUT THERE WAY TO MAKE OBAMA LOOK BAD NOW BECAUSE HE IS THE ONE THAT MIGHT HURT THERE MAN MCCAIN.
Kind of off the subject, but, after looking through Obama's press release on earmarks, the ONLY thing that jumped out at me is this:
"National Writing Project, $30,000,000
This funding would improve student achievement by improving the teaching and uses of writing in the nation's schools."
$30 million to improve writing skills? As far as I can garner from my 6-year-old's homework, writing still taught in school as part of the normal curriculum.
It helps that this apparent pork was "SUBMITTED BY NUMEROUS SENATORS (INCLUDING SENATOR OBAMA) ON BEHALF OF NATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS"