Replies

Oh, I see. Now it's the earmarks that Ron Paul submitted, then voted against. He's a hypocrite, then, and a "moderate conservative."

And these well-respected Jewish backers simply are unaware of Dr. Paul's checkered record? They would be backing a True Federalist like your candidate if it were known that Ron Paul leads a double life, pretending to be the Constitutionalist but, in reality, just a publicity seeker. He has Potomac Fever so bad he's delusional, you think?

Well, you can rationalize all you want, make up all the stories you want, connect dots all day and all night if you want. But you are never ever going to make a case for Ron Paul being either an anti-Semite or a Big Spender. The best you can come up with is calling him a "libertarian" running as a Republican, and for many of us that's a mark of distinction, not opprobrium.

Oh, I see. Now it's the earmarks that Ron Paul submitted, then voted against. He's a hypocrite, then, and a "moderate conservative."

You can save your breath. When I saw mnehrling's constant posting on the earmark issue, plus his adamant support for Fred Thompson, I showed him this excerpt from the Club for Growth, and asked when he would be withdrawing his support:

Thompson was fiercely protective when it came to his own earmarks. His congressional website boasts of the federal dollars he was able to "snag" for his Tennessee constituents, including $25 billion in highway funds; $70 million for the Tennessee Valley Authority; $2 million for the Tennessee River; and $23 million for the Spallation Neutron Source project. Thompson felt so strongly about preserving funding for the Tennessee Valley Authority, he fought to exempt funds for the TVA from the balanced budget constitutional amendment in 1995, carving out a new category of "constitutional pork." And though Thompson supported and voted for the presidential line-item veto, he fought vehemently to undo President Clinton's veto of two Tennessee projects.

In response to this, mnehrling said "The difference is Thompson doesn’t make him out to be the champion of anti-earmarks. I’m not harping on Paul’s earmarks per say, but the fact he says one thing but does another."

This is also nonsense. Thompson does indeed make himself out to be, in mnehrling's words "the champion of anti-earmarks".

He made a point of talking about pork barreling spending and the budget. Thompson said that Republicans "lost the advantage" in budgetary issues because they also over spent and did not do anything to get the budget under control. He said, "We went to drain the swamp and became the alligators."
He singled out Tom Coburn and John McCain as two senators he thought were principled on budgetary issues. When I mentioned Democratic Senator Kent Conrad as another budget hawk, he acknowledged that but said Senator Conrad was just as insistent as anyone else in bringing pork back to his home state.
Senator Thompson said it was too hard to change the system when the accomplishments were so minor and the setbacks were so large. To be clear, I didn't bring up the budget issue, he did. It seemed to be his primary source of frustration with his time in the Senate.

However, as you can see, mnehrling has not withdrawn his support for Fred Thompson. The earmark issue, in spite of his harping on the subject over and over again, is something he doesn't care about at all. To him, it's just a tool to try to use against Ron Paul.