Posted on 11/30/2011 8:52:31 PM PST by PhilipFreneau
Glenn Beck Smears Ron Paul With Half-Truths About Paul's Earmarks.
Today on his radio show Glenn Beck and his staff declared that Ron Paul is the "earmark king", and labeled Paul a hypocrit. Beck correctly stated that Paul adds many earmarks to spending bills, and then votes against the spending bills. What Beck left out (either by deceit or by ignorance) is that earmarks do not increase the size of a budget. The money allocated for a budget is set by the Appropriations Committee prior to any allocation or earmark. All money not allocated or earmarked is not deleted from the budget, but rather is turned over the the executive branch to spend as it sees fit.
According to Wikipedia [re. Earmark], "Scott Frisch and Sean Kelly point out that directing money to particular purposes is a core constitutional function of Congress. If Congress does not make a specific allocation, the task falls to the executive branch; there is no guarantee that the allocation made by executive agencies will be superior to Congress's. Presidents and executive officials can use the allocation of spending to reward friends and punish enemies." They also warned the "Tea Party's Anti-Earmark Crusade Gives More Power to President Obama".
Those are important points. Unallocated money has no transparency, and therefore can be used by the President to reward friends and punish enemies, without public scrutiny. Therefore, by earmarking as much as he can, Ron Paul is increasing the transparency of government spending. Until the Congress passes a law that requires all unallocated money to be deleted from the budget and returned to the Treasury, Congressman Paul is doing all he can do to increase the transparency of federal expenditures.
Glenn Beck is constantly preaching to us about the importance of (honorable) character. Maybe Beck should practice what he preaches.
Well, RuPaul claims to be an American, when in actuality he’s a sock puppet for Islamo-Nazi Iran. RuPaul claims to be a Conservative while trying to legalize drugs and prostitution, repealing DADT, cheering on gay marriage, supporting OWS, accepting an endorsement from Code Pinko, and taking tax money that was STOLEN from me and handing it to his cronies in Galveston. If that’s your idea of Conservatism, I can’t help you. You’re posting on the wrong site.
See, here’s the thing you don’t seem to understand. This is a CONSERVATIVE website. RuPaul is not a Conservative. He’s a liberaltarian. He’s as contemptible as the Authoritarian Left, therefore he’ll be treated as such by the majority of the posters here.
>>>An individual that tells a falsehood, like “Ron Paul is NOT antisemite piece of garbage.” or “Ron Paul is a Conservtive.”<<<
You are definitely the king of smears. How about some specifics?
BTW, why did you not address your slanderous claims about Ron Paul’s “earmarks”? I think you are a leftist mole.
>>>This is a CONSERVATIVE website.<<<
I hope so. Otherwise I have wasted a good part of 11 years of my life posting on Free Republic.
I will never submit to the notion that “conservatism” equals “Inquisition”.
Care to debate?
You’ve wasted those 11 years, regardless.
>>>You’ve wasted those 11 years, regardless.<<<
LOL. You are joking. There is no way you are linked to the Tea Party, because I am Tea Party. What is your agenda?
“I think you are a leftist mole.”
LOL! Humor will get you nowhere with me, Paulbot.
You want specifics ? RuPaul doesn’t believe in the death penalty, is unwilling to support a Constitutional amendment to defend traditional marriage from the Heathen Left, he defends Islamo-Nazi Iran, and blames the US for 9/11.
**********************************
“I don’t think it’s very good sign for civilization to still be invoking the death penalty. . . .
If you believe in the death penalty, what I really object to is the doctors participating in torture, and doctors who are there to make it smooth and sweet.
‘Oh, let’s put him to sleep.’ If it’s a death penalty, do it on Times Square, see ‘em get their head chopped off and see how all the people, see how much they like it, make ‘em look at it. I think it’s uncivilized.”
***********************************
“Mr. Speaker, while I oppose federal efforts to redefine marriage as something other than a union between one man and one woman, I do not believe a constitutional amendment is either a necessary or proper way to defend marriage.”
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul207.html
***********************************
“I would like to express my concerns over the Iran Threat Reduction Act of 2011 and my opposition to it being brought to the Floor for a vote. Let us be clear on one critical matter: the sanctions against Iran mandated by this legislation are definite steps toward a US attack on Iran. They will also, if actually applied, severely disrupt global trade and undermine the US economy, thereby harming our national security.
I am surprised and disturbed that the committee viewed this aggressive legislation to be so bipartisan and uncontroversial that a recorded vote was not even called.
Some may argue that we are pursuing sanctions so as to avoid war with Iran, but recent history teaches us otherwise. For how many years were sanctions placed on Iraq while we were told they were necessary to avoid war? Thousands of innocent Iraqis suffered and died under US sanctions and still the US invaded, further destroying the country. Are we safer after spending a trillion dollars or more to destroy Iraq and then rebuild it?
These new sanctions against Iran increasingly target other countries that seek to trade with Iran. The legislation will severely punish foreign companies or foreign subsidiaries of US companies if they do not submit to the US trade embargo on Iran. Some 15 years after the Iran Sanctions Act of 1996 failed to bring Iran to its knees, it is now to be US foreign policy to threaten foreign countries and companies. “
http://lewrockwell.com/paul/paul777.html
***********************************
“Ten years ago, shocking and horrific acts of terrorism were carried out on U.S. soil, taking nearly 3,000 innocent American lives. Without a doubt this action demanded retaliation and retribution. However, much has been done in the name of protecting the American people from terrorists that has reduced our prosperity and liberty and even made us less safe.
This is ironic and sad considering that the oft-repeated line concerning the reasoning behind the attacks is that they hate us for who we are – a free prosperous people – that we must not under any circumstances allow the terrorists to win. Though it is hard for many to believe, honest studies show that the real motivation behind the 9/11 attacks, and the vast majority of other instances of suicide terrorism, is not that our enemies are bothered by our way of life, neither is it our religion or our wealth – rather it is primarily occupation. If you were to imagine for a moment how you would feel if another country forcibly occupied the United States, had military bases and armed soldiers present in our hometown, you might begin to understand why foreign occupation upsets people so much.”
http://lewrockwell.com/paul/paul764.html
***********************************
You’re out of your mind if you think any of that drek is American, let alone Conservative.
So Drowning Pool and the Dead Kennedys are not in your CD player ?
LOL!
What would you like to debate ? That Rupaul voted to repeal DADT ? That his svengali Screwy Lewy Rockwell is not only Cindy Sheehan’s love slave, but an anarchist ? Perhaps you’d like to discuss RuPaul’s admiration of OWS, you know the same vermin that endorsed by Chairman Obama, the American Nazi Party, and the Communist Party USA ? Or, we could just get crazy and discuss the 9/11 Truthers and Neo-Nazis who make up the bulk of his supporters.
Where would you like to start ? I’m all ears.
The Tea Party supports crackpots like RuPaul who were endorsed by Code Pinko ?
Since when ? Did I miss a meeting or something ?
Smears Ron Paul? What am I missing?
>>>What would you like to debate?<<<
CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLES. Are you ready to debate?
Oh, yeah ? I’m from Luxembourg!
LOL!
Since when do two wrongs make a right ?
Your response is unnerving. RuPaul is violating the Constitution left and right like a drunken Marxist and you don’t seem to care.
“Ron Paul earmark to Nu blac:
City of Bay City NuBlac Rehab Center
Bay City, TX Commerce, Justice & Science $500,000”
Trick question: What Enumerated Power gives CONgress the power to spend money on this ?
“I hope so. Otherwise I have wasted a good part of 11 years of my life posting on Free Republic.”
And it’s obvious you haven’t learned a thing.
Nothing. Just another Paulbot whining.
Sure. RuPaul earmarks funds for unconstitutional uses.
Next ?
>>>RuPaul is violating the Constitution left and right like a drunken Marxist and you don’t seem to care.<<<
Only a fool would believe a word you say.
BTW, how about accepting my previous challenge to you to debate Constitutional Principles.
LOL. There is no way you will accept. Because you are a BIG-GOVERNMENT STATIST! A COWARD. A LIAR!
>>>Sure. RuPaul earmarks funds for unconstitutional uses.<<<
Only a fool would believe a word you say.
BTW, how about accepting my previous challenge to you to debate Constitutional Principles.
LOL. There is no way you will accept. Because you are a BIG-GOVERNMENT STATIST! A COWARD. A LIAR!
Absolutely Nobama wrote:
>>>What would you like to debate?<<<
I replied:
>>>CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLES. Are you ready to debate?<<<
To date, I have received no response. It appears the fearless “Absolutely Nobama” is much too chicken to reply. I must assume “Absolutely Nobama” is, in reality, a total coward when it comes to debating anything of substance. He has nothing to offer except ad hominem attacks and innuendo.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.