http://mobile.nytimes.com/art/118166/21

NYT has a fun little story this morning on earmark hysteria. While offering a partisan balance (alternating back and forth between Democrat and Republican vignettes), it does a good job of highlighting what two-faced hacks most alleged fiscal conservatives are. I wish it had examined Bohner's partisan rhetoric on earmarks along side his assertion that 'there is no such thing as an earmark', but it also did a good job showing there is a bit of contention on the Republican side between those who do not mind earmarks and those who say they do not like earmarks and go after them anyway.

Three small things the article left out that are important add-ons:

1. The earmarks in the HHS bill, even after both sides accepted every single mark, amount to .6% of the HHS budget and less than .1% of the whole budget.

2. City University deciding to name a school of public policy after the man who has represented them for 30 years and him helping them get public dollars for a public education institute