Replies

What have I said about him that is false? That he claims to not want to spend taxpayer money (except when absolutely necessary), but is in there with the rest of them when it comes to grabbing for earmarks?

Your posts lead people to believe Ron Paul has actually received earmarks. He hasn't. Go find some that have passed and been funded. Go find these $400 million he's received. Heck, just go find $4 million in earmarks for RP's district.

Earmarks don't pass unless a bunch of House members are all asking for basically the same thing and the appropriate committee gives in to them. Or if powerful ranking members in the majority and minority party cut slices off to reward their own districts (see Murtha, Pelosi, Hoyer and an unnamed Republican candidate on how this is done on the Defense Bill).

When you won't trade votes, when you vote against all the pork, you just don't get earmarks.

And since you're charging that Ron Paul has brought pork home to his district with these earmarks, it's up to you to prove it. Because the conservative press/media and all the rest of the media can't seem to find those successful earmarks. In fact, you wouldn't even know Ron Paul had submitted them if he didn't release them to the public. Obama and Clinton still haven't released theirs, last I heard. And don't be fooled by the Dim claims that all pork and earmarks are now "transparent". It's another lie and the Dims are bigger porkers than they claimed the GOP to be in '06. However, the Dims aren't the only porkers in the House. The GOP porkers aren't as honest as Ron Paul and they, unlike him, do trade votes for porky earmarks. And unlike you, I can and have proved what I'm saying on earlier threads.

Put up or shut up. I have evidence of other porking by Republicans in collusion with the Dims. But you can't produce anything remotely comparable against Ron Paul.