The sweeping change on earmarks being proposed by the halo-laden Democrats is, according to the NY Times' David Kirkpatrick:
"[W]ould apply only to 'district-oriented earmarks,' that is, projects obtained for constituents. Lawmakers already boast of sponsoring such items. The earmarks involved in corruption cases are often directed to contractors or campaign contributors elsewhere."
So, the answer is to force Members to make public those earmarks they already brag about (called, "pork") while allowing them to wipe their fingerprints from those earmarks bought and paid for by people like Murtha's donors, family members, and former staffers.
Democrats are not exactly cleaning out the cesspool of corruption. It seems more like what has been uncharitably described as a French Shower: Spritzing some perfume near the offending area not to remove the smell, but to overwhelm it with yet another.
On the Secret Decoder Ring page today: Links to the three articles discussed above, a link to an explanation of ABSCAM; an amusing Mullfoto taken at a restaurant in Georgetown, and a Catchy Caption of the Day.
It’s No Big Deal, But Top Hillary Advisers Knew Right Away That Benghazi Was A Terrorist Attack | Matt Vespa