Ron Paul's Bringing Home the Bacon

From the comments section at the end of the above copied & pasted rant....

2. I would urge the writer of this article to correct himself. Scott is it? Dr. Paul has asked for earmarks for his district, true. But if you look a little more closely, Dr. Paul also voted against the budget proposal that included said earmarks. I guess Dr. Paul may be guilty of teasing his constituents, but he did not vote for the funding of these earmarks. Sorry Scott, Dr. Paul really is DR. NO. VOTE RON PAUL!!!!

Next.

 

Lets also notice that the "news" site linked to is a blog. Nothing wrong with blogs, but they don't carry the same weight as news sites.

 

Keep trying, Timmy.

It's not like Ron Paul committed sentences of rapists just because they found Jesus, or supports my money going to educate illegals.

And I don't think you'll hear Dr. paul say word one about anyone's religion.

Huckleberry should stick to bass playing.

 

From the blog about bring home the bacon thingy. I think Mr. Fowlers comment put it into perspective.

 

Ron Paul's Bringing Home the Bacon

Where did the bacon go in the first place?

 

Probably the same reason you call George Bush a conservative despite his record deficit spending and policy of uncontrolled borders.

There is a vast difference between a conservative and a Republican apologist.

 

If this is true, it kind of sounds like a pragmatic vote. Paul can say "I voted against it," but he knew it was going to pass and he wanted to get in on the goods. So it kind of sounds like having his cake and eating it too.

 

Oh yes., and how much bacon was he requesting. Didn't see any mega amounts on his requests.

 

That is very true. Those on this thread and others who constantly cut down Ron Paul are not interested in a debate over the issues. It is quite clear they are not true conservatives, but Republican apologists. These are the ones who are more interested in party loyalty than the interests of the United States, even if it comes down to voting for an abortionist.

 

So is it your contention that it is the amount of money involved that makes ir right or wrong? I would think that if earmarks were wrong, they would be wrong no matter how much money is involved.

 

Did you read the article pastor Larry? Read it first then you are welcome to criticize.

 

Kudlow did a piece on this on CNBC and asked Paul about it. Paul admitted to being the "King of Earmarks" in Texas but said he voted against bills. Kudlow pointed out that he knew many if not most all the bills would pass anyway. Paul stammered his way through saying that he was just "working the system as it is."

This continued ability for Paul to speak out of both sides of his mouth, coupled with (exampled by?) his Paul's lack of pro-life statements but opposite voting record caused me to lose a great deal of respect for him.

 

I find that I agree with 2 Timothy2:1-4 in this instance. However, it doesn't change my support for Ron Paul. There is no such thing as a perfect candidate.

The Huckabee supporters are standing by their man as his flaws are being pointed out. I will do the same with mine unless something much worse than this is put forward for examination.

 

I wouldn't call Paul a conservative nor would I think Paul would call himself a conservative (I could be wrong). However you are correct, their are many RINO around today. In the town that I live in, most of the Republican were members of the Democratic party up north, so they are Republican in name only.

 

You are correct. Ron Paul is a libertarian.

 

I'm not a fan of Ron Paul or libertarianism* at all. But this is silly. Part of his job is to represent his district and to seek funding (that is, bring tax monies back from the federal government) for the welfare of his district and the nation.

As someone who works for a large engineering firm, I happen to know that he is merely referencing a project that the readers of these earmarks will know all about. I doubt there is any reason for him to go into extensive detail on these projects for this purpose. It would be a waste of time and money.

Probably millions...

I grew up on the Texas Gulf Coast, not this district but slightly farther north, so I am probably better prepared than most to analyze these requests. The vast majority of these requests are for transportation projects which, in my opinion, are definitely the responsibility of the federal government. For instance, the GIWW referred to frequently is the Gulf Intercoastal Waterway, that is a massive shipping corridor for barge traffic and interstate commerce. The GIWW needs frequent maintenance to ensure a consistent depth, maintenance of the lock system, and to safeguard shipping traffic.

And regarding wild American shrimp, did you know that today many shrimp are actually raised in man-made ponds in architectural areas throughout the world that potentially expose consumers to agricultural chemical leaching back out of the soil into the ponds? Promotion of wild American shrimp will help the shrimping industry on the Gulf Coast will help preserve jobs and provide a safer product to American tables.


*In my opinion, libertarianism doesn't take the sinful condition of humanity seriously. They seem to believe that if there were less restraints on society, then everyone would be better off. Seems to me that the only ones who would be better off would be the ones who figure out how to oppress others.