“That is because he has not accomplished anything, except acquire as many earmarks as possible. He is not known as the earmark king for nothing. So as far as bringing home the pork he has done something. As far as doing anything about our debt he has done nothing. He never has and I doubt if he ever would.”
Fair enough. I can understand the position that if he says he opposes earmarks, he should vote against every bill that contains an earmark for consistency. I can appreciate that stance. It is my understanding that he puts in earmarks for his district, then opposes the bill in the hope that the bill will be defeated. But if it is not defeated (because most Dims and elephants don’t oppose earmarks), and if his constituents are going to be paying for pet projects all over the country, it would be unfair if they don’t get their share. Of course if you can get enough people to vote like Paul, Paul’s district won’t get earmarks because the whole bill will go down. If you’re mad because he wants his constituency to share in earmarks if the bill passes, then so be it.
“Appeasement Paul has been Chairman of the Domestic Monetary Policy Committee, the committee that oversees the Federal Reserve for almost two years. He has complained about the Fed, Reserve for about 20. In his time as chairman you do not think he had an opportunity to do something? He had the opportunity, but was unwilling to do anything.”
If that is true, then Paul should be removed as chairman and replaced by someone who will do something about it. Let me know who you think Boehner might appoint to chair that committee to really do something and I will pass the recommendation along to my congress critter.
“Appeasement Paul talks big, does little.”
You are welcome to your own opinion as to how big he may talk. What is important to me is that he has opposed the likes of No Child Gets an Education, Tarp, MediPill, etc. That is not “little” in my book. It’s certainly better than we saw out of Jorge Bush.