ArchPundit

I’m generally one of the sharpest critics of scientific earmarks.  The problem with most of them is that they aren’t submitted to peer review and so the resource allocation is random. Instead, the National Science Foundation or other agency should submit proposals through peer review.

I am not completely against infrastruture earmarks simply because sometimes that the only realistic way to get them paid for and some are reasonable expenditures–like a new projector for the Adler

Now, if McCain wants to establish a scientific educational fund for the Adler to compete for the funds, I could live with that, but this is one of the best earmarks I’ve seen. The level of jackassery to suggest it’s just an overhead projector is unfathomable.