Man, the wiki page really makes him look like a short-sighted jerk. A lot of those items are the stereotypical headlines that lack the needed context.
Like the $3k for if military should use umbrellas in the rain: well, should they? Perhaps only officers, so soldiers have their hands free? Maybe we should just contract a clip of some kind that will hold the umbrella to their gear? Or maybe it's only worth it on base? I mean, how far will $3k even go - a week or so of consultant time?
Or the $57k for measuring stewardesses. These are the people who may still be moving about the cabin while everyone else is seated. How do we decide how much a seat on a $100,000,000 plane needs? Can the seat be wider just above the waist of the lady, such that the seats can slightly encroach on the isle? (Big money to be had there possibly - though it's worth noting the 1975 flights likely still had an implicit assumption about stewardess ... styling.) Is it reasonable the typical rider can squeeze past a stewardess? How often and with what kind of difficulty? Will they be required to get out of the way in the event of an emergency or should they stay to direct, potentially blocking the path? In this case, we spent about $130 bucks a few hundred times. An engineer needed those numbers somewhere down the line, and hopefully some insight was gained. Never mind that someone had the (likely) enviable job of measuring the fitting of a few hundred 1970s-style stewardesses.
I'm not saying a lot of the stuff's doesn't make me gloriously incredulous, but it's super easy to just take something at face value and just mock it. (Not that your linking it implies anything - people who mock like Proxmire just get my goat.)