[dirtboy]

is one of the only politicians who is really willing to talk his talk and walk his walk.

Hardly. Paul talks the Constitution but pushes earmarks. That's called hypocrisy.

[marsh_of_mists]

The fact is that earmarks do not increase government spending. They do not add any extra expense to the bill. That money was already "marked" to be spent, as long as the bill was passed. It was just a matter of how and to whom and into what pork it was divied up. Paul felt that he might as well introduce his constituents own earmarks to bring some of the tax money back to them, since it would just have been wasted on other earmarked pork anyway. Ideally, in Paul's world, such bills should never come into existence at all. Thus, he votes against them and he would veto them all if he were president.