Proof Ron Paul will win.

I have no details, but I would suspect that Paul Guides pork to his district. Doesn't he keep getting elected ?
Ohh but when Paul does it is called a project or some other better sounding name.
 
RStringfield said:
So what, you think Galveston should be denied federal funds while being taxed, because their congressional rep opposes big government? That's a bs argument. Paul does not pursue pork bills.
Click to expand...

He has good logic behind it, RS, but you know that isn't going to play out.

If the people of Galveston are paying taxes for earmarks they should get them too, even if they believe that they should have the right to just keep the money.
 
RStringfield said:
So what, you think Galveston should be denied federal funds while being taxed, because their congressional rep opposes big government? That's a bs argument. Paul does not pursue pork bills.
Click to expand...
No I think he should be consistent. If the Government has no business bailing out people that live in low lying coastal areas then that means ALL of them not just all of them but Galvaston and Brazoria County. Which is always getting federal funds for flooding and hurricane relief. If you have a true ethical problem with the feds bailing these people out then you have that ethical problem EVEN with the people that live in your district.
 
Socrtease said:
No I think he should be consistent. If the Government has no business bailing out people that live in low lying coastal areas then that means ALL of them not just all of them but Galvaston and Brazoria County. Which is always getting federal funds for flooding and hurricane relief. If you have a true ethical problem with the feds bailing these people out then you have that ethical problem EVEN with the people that live in your district.
Click to expand...

Yeah? So, has he argued anything different? I don't see how the fact that his district gets these funds shows inconsistency. He does not have any power to return those funds or over how they are spent.
 
Maybe I didn't read this clearly but is Paul suppose to not take funds that his tax payers have paid for? It's like the argument that since someone doesn't believe in social security they shouldn't accept it even though they've paid in all their life.
 
Obfuscate said:
Maybe I didn't read this clearly but is Paul suppose to not take funds that his tax payers have paid for? It's like the argument that since someone doesn't believe in social security they shouldn't accept it even though they've paid in all their life.
Click to expand...

And he does not even have the ability to refuse the funds. He is not governor of his district. He is their rep in the house, only.
 
RStringfield said:
No, he votes against the bills, every time. The most he does is pass along requests for funding.
Click to expand...

Let me see if I'm hearing you right? He votes against tax increases, but sends earmarks for passed legislation. Earmarks allow him to help with the increase in spending, while giving him deniability. Is that right?
 
His consituents request funding and he passes those along. You expect him to deny them representation based on his philosophy? Many of these things cannot exist so long as the government crowds out the market. Further, his constituents are taxed and have as much right to the funds as anyone else.

Ron Paul on earmarks...
http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2007/tst061807.htm
 
RStringfield said:
His consituents request funding and he passes those along. You expect him to deny them representation based on his philosophy? Many of these things cannot exist so long as the government crowds out the market. Further, his constituents are taxed and have as much right to the funds as anyone else.

Ron Paul on earmarks...
http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2007/tst061807.htm
Click to expand...

What I got from reading that is that he was against the 'transparency' that allows constituents know who is throwing in those earmarks. The system seens analogous to overbooking flights.
 
Kathianne said:
What I got from reading that is that he was against the 'transparency' that allows constituents know who is throwing in those earmarks. The system seens analogous to overbooking flights.
Click to expand...

??? He applauded the added transparency. From the article...

While this is certainly a victory for more transparency and openness in the spending process, and as such should be applauded, I am concerned that this may not necessarily be a victory for those of us who want a smaller federal government.
 
Kathianne said:
Let me see if I'm hearing you right? He votes against tax increases, but sends earmarks for passed legislation. Earmarks allow him to help with the increase in spending, while giving him deniability. Is that right?
Click to expand...

That is what I got out of that post as well.
 
What I get from reading this thread is that many of his critics are intellectually dishonest and completely full of shit. A minority voice for limited government cannot hope to win when running on a platform of depriving his consituents federal tax dollars when they are required to pay into that system.

Philosophically, there is no reason why one should not accept services which they were required to pay for, because they do not appreciate the system that forces them to pay. Same sort of retarded argument you get that we should not drive on public roads or other nonsense. What's even more humorous is if one were to go this extreme and quit paying taxes you guys would call them terrorist, burn em out of their homes and do everything you could to see them killed.
 
Kathianne said:
Let me see if I'm hearing you right? He votes against tax increases, but sends earmarks for passed legislation. Earmarks allow him to help with the increase in spending, while giving him deniability. Is that right?
Click to expand...



this is the kind of "I voted for it before I voted against it" kind of stuff that kerry was skewered for.
 
Watermark said:
OH, like Digg.

Digg kind of annoys me because I always have to click to show the posts with negative digg points. The ones with highly negative digg points, though, are usually the ones that are most amusing. It would certainly be an interesting feature. Why don't we give it a one week trial, and then we have a poll open for the week after that that judges how members liked it (no duplicate IP voting allowed?
Click to expand...

in your settings you can change it watermark so that it will display all comments.

Btw: add me: exoendo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top