As of 5 p.m. CT, the Drudge Report had prominently labeled this AP item a “slap” against Obama’s earlier-announced $100M cost-reduction effort.

I recall (though haven’t had time to go back and source) similarly snide dismissals of McCain’s earmark-fixation.

Running through both critiques is a common, wave-of-the-hand theme: “Posh. A drop in the bucket. Won’t do any good.”

Perhaps. But don’t we have to start somewhere? Isn’t it better to save $100M than not? Isn’t it better to eliminate billions in earmarks than not? If every budget-cutting gesture is deemed worthless, why bother? Wouldn’t it be more productive to embrace each suggestion of this ilk on the path to seeking more? Call me naive; label me a dreamer; but it seems to this neophyte that if you add up enough dollar bills, you eventually arrive at a meaningful sum.