Author Topic: Ron Paul & Pork? EEEEEEEEEEK! IT'S TRUE! (Read 1350 times)

Dee · « **on:** November 30, 2011, 12:33:41 PM »

Having been a long time supporter of Mr. Paul, and very dismayed to find that he is a DECEIVER like the rest of them. Mr. Paul has garnered MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN PORK, for his district it is documented fact.
It seems thru all this he has done so by attaching HIS PORK to popular socialist type bills that are both Constitutional, and UNCONSTITUTIONAL. If the bill is a GOOD bill, he votes for it. If it is an UNCONSTITUTIONAL bill, but popular, he attaches his pork spending bill to it, and then votes against it, know it will pass anyway. Very schrude, but deceptive none the less. How sad. His PRO CONSTITUTION RECORD is preserved, and he gets his PORK SPENDING THRU THE "BACK DOOR", looking like the good guy.

Gary G · « **Reply #1 on:** November 30, 2011, 01:00:46 PM »

There is a difference between pork and earmarks. R.P. has always defended earmarks because if the peoples representatives don't earmark the money already appropriated, then the executive branch (Obama) will spend it as they see fit.

http://www.dailypaul.com/159089/i-was-told-ron-paul-loves-pork-spending

The Republicrats are afraid Paul will rain on their party!

Lost Farmboy · « **Reply #2 on:** November 30, 2011, 01:32:39 PM »

Dee did you say he votes to protect the constitution every time. What more could you ask for in these times. When Jesus comes back I will gladly except Him as king. Until then Ron Paul is the best choice we have.

saddlebum · « **Reply #3 on:** November 30, 2011, 01:49:42 PM »

"Pork" and "Earmarks" are both dirty words to those who wish to use them to bash some politician.

If there were no earmarks, then how would anyone see their tax dollars come back to their state and work for them. It really depends on what the money is used for. Something stupid and wasteful, or something legitimate. I don't have a problem with earmarks as long as it's not something foolish or a waste of money. Or paybacks for unions or favors or bribes and such.

Pork is always dirty! In my mind it is money spent foolishly and it's unnecessary and wasteful. And usually a heck of alot of it! Pork is where we see the the most corruption.

I'm not sure that what Dee is posting about is all that seedy and dishonest. I'm not a Paul supporter but, it appears to me that he is just trying to get some of the tax payers money back to them in the form of public works and infrastructure projects and stuff. I am ASSUMING this because I don't know all the particulars and what the earmarks were for. For instance, if he didn't like any of the bills up for a vote, how would he get any tax dollars back to Texas? Attempting to get legitimate money for legitimate reasons while voting his "conscience", (such as it is), does not seem too seedy to me. I would need to know more before I could spank him on doing what Dee posted. Is it "pork spending" or is it getting the earmarks that the tax payers deserve, while voting the way he thinks is right?

Dee · « **Reply #4 on:** November 30, 2011, 02:01:52 PM »

My point is: Ron Paul's platform is "out of control spending". Pork barrel spending built the highway that dead ends into a mountain. Pork barrel spending is part of the problem. It's like the recently revealed fact that it is against the law for you to do insider trading, but it is not against the law for congressmen, and senators to do exactly the same thing. Speaker of the House John Boehner has made millions doin this, yet claims to be conservative.
Ron Paul has created an illusion that I bought into for years, thinking he was better than the rest. Apparently he is. At hiding the fact that he's blowin money on stuff we don't need either. I just pointed it out here. I have no interest in changing your minds, your all gonna accept what ever you want to accept.

saddlebum · « **Reply #5 on:** November 30, 2011, 02:08:16 PM »

Quote from: Lost Farmboy on November 30, 2011, 01:32:39 PM

Dee did you say he votes to protect the constitution every time. What more could you ask for in these times. When Jesus comes back I will gladly except Him as king. Until then Ron Paul is the best choice we have.

If you wait until Jesus comes back to except Him as King, it will be too late.
Ron Paul will never hold down the place that is reserved ONLY for Jesus Christ!!

Why is it that every time Paul is discussed, we get cult sounding comments?
Paul is not a savior. Nor is he THE Savior!......Not even close!
Using them in the same sentence is really messed up!

The fact that you are not willing to discuss the possibility of ethical misconduct by Paul and don't seem to care as long as he votes the Constitution, makes me think maybe you should not wait till Jesus comes back to accept Him as King. I'm thinking the time is NOW!
God bless and don't get mad.........................

yellowtail3 · « **Reply #6 on:** November 30, 2011, 02:26:33 PM »

Quote from: Dee on November 30, 2011, 12:33:41 PM

If it is an UNCONSTITUTIONAL bill, but popular, he attaches his pork spending bill to it, and then votes against it, know it will pass anyway. Very schrude, but deceptive none the less.

Well, so long as he's schrude about it, I still like Dr. Paul; not only is he right politically, I think he's a good man. I think he's much better than the other choices, Left & Right

Quote from: Dee on November 30, 2011, 02:01:52 PM

My point is: Ron Paul's platform is "out of control spending".

See, I don't think of that as his platform. Rather, I think his thing is reducing gov't to constitutional role, and a minimalist one... trimming it back from the extra-constitutional role it has gathered. That, and emphasizing liberty - none of the gov't business to tell people who they can/can't sleep with, read smoke, drink, grown in their gardens or sell to their neighbors.

Dee · « **Reply #7 on:** November 30, 2011, 02:44:01 PM »

I have the tendency to look at the candidate as to whom they really are. If I find out one, is doing something he criticizes others for doing, I find that hypocritical, and dishonest. I posted a thread concerning Newt. I was enlightened by others, and accepted the enlightenment. In regards to Mr. Paul, he is now, basically off the table for me. I moving on to Bachman, and the other guy. I want to know what I'm voting for, and whom I'm supportin. There are no perfect candidates, as there are no perfect voters. I just want the best I can get, with the least amount of luggage. But that's just me. I posted what I learned about Paul, and it matters not to me, if anyone acts on the info. It is just info.

Gary G · « **Reply #8 on:** November 30, 2011, 03:04:26 PM »

Quote

Ron Paul has created an illusion that I bought into for years, thinking he was better than the rest. Apparently he is. At hiding the fact that he's blowin money on stuff we don't need either. I just pointed it out here.

The place to nip spending is in the appropriations bill. Since it is always extravagant, R.P. has voted NO on it for thirty years. After the money is appropriated, to not spend it would be to say okay Obama, I am not going to spend any so you get to spend my part. This is not hypocritical if it is spent on worthwhile endeavors and not on a road through my property in the middle of nowhere.

nw_hunter · « **Reply #9 on:** November 30, 2011, 03:59:35 PM »

Quote from: Dee on November 30, 2011, 02:44:01 PM

I have the tendency to look at the candidate as to whom they really are. If I find out one, is doing something he criticizes others for doing, I find that hypocritical, and dishonest. I posted a thread concerning Newt. I was enlightened by others, and accepted the enlightenment. In regards to Mr. Paul, he is now, basically off the table for me. I moving on to Bachman, and the other guy. I want to know what I'm voting for, and whom I'm supportin. There are no perfect candidates, as there are no perfect voters. I just want the best I can get, with the least amount of luggage. But that's just me. I posted what I learned about Paul, and it matters not to me, if anyone acts on the info. It is just info.

Let's hear what Dr Paul has to say in his defense!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWTyHbGcUQY&NR=1

yellowtail3 · « **Reply #10 on:** November 30, 2011, 04:29:31 PM »

Quote from: nw_hunter on November 30, 2011, 03:59:35 PM

Let's hear what Dr Paul has to say in his defense!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWTyHbGcUQY&NR=1

Useful link; thanks. I hadn't heard this criticism of Dr Paul before. I still like him.

Dr. Paul: "I think the people that are critical of that don't understand the process..."

Doublebass73 · « **Reply #11 on:** November 30, 2011, 04:49:41 PM »

Dee,

Could you post some sources for your research in this matter? I happen to agree with what Gary is saying but I'm always open minded to check additional info.

I personally think Dr. Paul is the best candidate we have but if anyone wants to do an issue by issue comparison with their favorite candidate to Ron Paul then I welcome it.

Singleshotsam · « **Reply #12 on:** December 01, 2011, 05:07:07 AM »

While I respect your right to vote for whoever candidate you see best dee, what arguement to you have that can prove that Bachmann has a better plan to put our country back on the right track financially?

gypsyman · « **Reply #13 on:** December 01, 2011, 06:44:18 AM »

It looks like the best 2 candidates in the running so far is either RP or Bachman. Just have to listen, and try and learn more on them. It will boil down to voting for the lessor of 2 evils. gypsyman

powderman · « **Reply #14 on:** December 01, 2011, 06:49:34 AM »

Quote from: gypsyman on December 01, 2011, 06:44:18 AM

It looks like the best 2 candidates in the running so far is either RP or Bachman. Just have to listen, and try and learn more on them. It will boil down to voting for the lessor of 2 evils. gypsyman

Which is exactly what will be required to beat the obaminable illegal kenyan. POWDERMAN.

Singleshotsam · « **Reply #15 on:** December 01, 2011, 07:38:49 AM »

Quote

Which is exactly what will be required to beat the obaminable illegal kenyan. POWDERMAN.

And the cycle of brainwashing madess continues. Your only looking at half the problem, "getting Obama out of office"... If you elect a candidate slightly less liberal your not trying to better the country. Your just trying to stall for time until another more liberal candidate gets into office.

The problem is making the change in your own life first. Become more fiscally conservative. Help your neighbors and set good examples. Teach the younger generation that it isn't big governments fault were in this mess. It's the peoples fault for not controlling their government.

Until people wake up and get un-brainwashed by the "two party system" lie, were going to keep going down the road of progressive liberalism and ultimately socialism. That's where your elect the lesser of two evils arguement winds up Comrade.

Dee · « **Reply #16 on:** December 03, 2011, 01:29:40 PM »

Quote from: Singleshotsam on December 01, 2011, 05:07:07 AM

While I respect your right to vote for whoever candidate you see best dee, what arguement to you have that can prove that Bachmann has a better plan to put our country back on the right track financially?

I don't care to argue for or against Paul, or anyone else. I posted info for interested folks to look into if they wish. I'm am not gonna get into a debate about whom is right and whom is wrong on presidential candidates. I tried that last election, and believe it or not, I was about the only one supporting Paul, and was ridiculed by most everyone, some of who are now SUPPORTING Paul. Go figure. Last election, I was wrong and they were right, now their right, and supportin the one I was for, when I was wrong.

Matt · « **Reply #17 on:** December 03, 2011, 05:38:18 PM »

Here is how I see it:
His district deserves their share of whatever funding is available to them.
He knows the bills he introduces will get tabled or shot down all together and if he puts his requests into them then his district does not get its funding.
The bills he adds his funding requests to are ones he does not agree with but he knows they will pass and his district will get its money.
I see nothing wrong with working within the system to ensure his constitutes get a share of the funding.

If some would pull themselves from in front of the TV and take the time to research and understand what is going on they might change their view on a lot of things.

Matt

Dee · « **Reply #18 on:** December 04, 2011, 01:42:57 AM »

Well Matt, I for one watch very little TV. Most of what you say is true, in the sense that, the money is going to be blown for some stupid project anyway, might as well blow it in my district too.
I spent last election being told I was wasting my vote, by supporting Ron Paul. I was told everything from how stupid I was, to actually wanting Obama to win, by supporting Paul, and as I said, by most on these forums.
Now, after a couple of years, these same folks, think Paul is the second coming, and are totally closed to any negative info on the man. Being a life long Texan (62 years worth), I am disappointed that Paul has been criticizing "pork" in bills, but has been "putting pork" in bills. Despite views to the contrary, "character does matter", and to say this is not ethical, or moral, is a true statement. I am totally at odds with Paul regarding Israel, but would be open if he would better explain his stance. At the present Fox News is hyping his refusal to attend a debate hosted by Donald Trump. For that, I am in full support of him, as Donald Trump in my opinion is an egotistical ass, that is "all hat and not cattle" in the relm of world politics.
What everyone, or anyone, does, or does not do, with this enlightenment, honestly does not matter to me. Do I want another 4 years of Obama? No I do not, but once again, we make excuses for a "new chosen candidate's" behavior. Folks are "desperate" to get rid of Obama. Well, if he gets 4 more years, they'll really be desperate.
As far as Paul getting the nomination, I doubt he will even get close. He does not interview well, and his cloths don't seem to fit due to his physic. If he were to however, I would vote for Paul, despite my disappointment. The media has chosen, and unless the heat gets too intense, Newt will get the nod. He is the Republicans friend.
I am now looking "again" at Bachman.

magooch · « **Reply #19 on:** December 04, 2011, 03:56:34 AM »

The very purpose of appropriation legislation is to provide funds for specific and legitimate purposes; it is not to create a slush fund that is up for grabs by unscrupuless lawmakers. The process has been corrupted for far too long and there is no way to rationalize what it is.

Saddlebum is about right in stating that it all depends on what the money is spent for. The caveat is that one man's necessity is another mans pork. The only practical way to control it is to shine a lot of light on the process and hope voters elect honorable people. The most important factor in the whole thing is to have an executive (President) who understands the difference between what some folks would like to spend money on and what is mandatory. And then that executive has to have the guts to throw the whole thing back if it doesn't meet the standard. That's called a veto.

nw_hunter · « **Reply #20 on:** December 04, 2011, 05:35:47 AM »

Quote from: Dee on December 04, 2011, 01:42:57 AM

Well Matt, I for one watch very little TV. Most of what you say is true, in the sense that, the money is going to be blown for some stupid project anyway, might as well blow it in my district too.
I spent last election being told I was wasting my vote, by supporting Ron Paul. I was told everything from how stupid I was, to actually wanting Obama to win, by supporting Paul, and as I said, by most on these forums.
Now, after a couple of years, these same folks, think Paul is the second coming, and are totally closed to any negative info on the man. Being a life long Texan (62 years worth), I am disappointed that Paul has been criticizing "pork" in bills, but has been "putting pork" in bills. Despite views to the contrary, "character does matter", and to say this is not ethical, or moral, is a true statement. I am totally at odds with Paul regarding Israel, but would be open if he would better explain his stance. At the present Fox News is hyping his refusal to attend a debate hosted by Donald Trump. For that, I am in full support of him, as Donald Trump in my opinion is an egotistical ass, that is "all hat and not cattle" in the relm of world politics.
What everyone, or anyone, does, or does not do, with this enlightenment, honestly does not matter to me. Do I want another 4 years of Obama? No I do not, but once again, we make excuses for a "new chosen candidate's" behavior. Folks are "desperate" to get rid of Obama. Well, if he gets 4 more years, they'll really be desperate.
As far as Paul getting the nomination, I doubt he will even get close. He does not interview well, and his cloths don't seem to fit due to his physic. If he were to however, I would vote for Paul, despite my disappointment. The media has chosen, and unless the heat gets too intense, Newt will get the nod. He is the Republicans friend.
I am now looking "again" at Bachman.

I have always been a Paul supporter, as Matt and several others have been on the forum. I don't really give a hoot what others say about a vote for Paul or any other candidate the GOP doesn't endorse, as being a vote for the enemy (Democrat)." As far as his appearance" It's what's inside the person that counts. Not what a suit looks like on them. If it takes a slick tongued, Hollywood model type to win the presidency, then we are doomed anyway

And to those that called us names for voting for him and are now supporters of Paul...............GREAT! That tells me our message got through to some.
What troubles me is.......Someone that did support him now want to toss him aside because of media propaganda against him.

To each his own!

Dee · « **Reply #21 on:** December 04, 2011, 05:51:55 AM »

Media propagana? Hmmmmm Where did that come from I wonder?
What doesn't trouble me, is that your troubled by my looking at all aspects of an election. You shouldn't really care what I think. I certainly don't care what you think.

yellowtail3 · « **Reply #22 on:** December 04, 2011, 06:50:20 AM »

Quote from: Dee on December 04, 2011, 05:51:55 AM

You shouldn't really care what I think. I certainly don't care what you think.

If that's the case... then why the heck are you posting anything here?

Dee · « **Reply #23 on:** December 04, 2011, 07:06:25 AM »

That's really a good question yt. Even for you.

nw_hunter · « **Reply #24 on:** December 04, 2011, 09:56:08 AM »

Quote from: Dee on December 04, 2011, 05:51:55 AM

Media propagana? Hmmmmm Where did that come from I wonder?
What doesn't trouble me, is that your troubled by my looking at all aspects of an election. You shouldn't really care what I think. I certainly don't care what you think.

Without trying to make this sound personal.........By Media propaganda, I mean. Biased media against a certain person or message. I try and look at all aspects of an election also. If I hear or read a disturbing quote or he or she said comment, I try and research it before formulating my opinion Especially if it's something I wouldn't expect coming from someone I have a lot of respect for.

In today's misinformation media everything should be suspect. When I read the Subject line.....Ron Paul & Pork?EEEEEEEEEK ITS TRUE. Flag's went up!They lowered again though!

Perhaps I really shouldn't care what others think.......But I do!

Dee · « **Reply #25 on:** December 04, 2011, 02:09:01 PM »

Well nw_hunter, it is very hard to sometimes to come up with a thread title that will suit everyone, and as far as sending flags in any direction, I have put my flags in a box. I have my own methods of looking at candidates, will look at other opinions, but not necessarily react to them.
As I have said before, and apparently it was missed, I don't watch much TV, including Fox News. They all have their agenda. Your remark as to your being troubled about my ABANDONING PAUL WAS PERSONAL, and was obviously due to you missing, or ignoring the fact, that in post # 19, I stated that if Paul won the nomination I would vote for him.
As far as "misinformation" the pork fact concerning Paul is not misinformation.
I have not, and will not, encourage anyone to vote for anyone. It's a free country, and everyone should vote for whom ever they feel deserves their vote. Nothing anyone says or does, surprises me anymore, and I spend very little time worrying about it. Everyone "thinks" they know best, and are quick to say so. I see very little difference in this election, than any of the others I have watched in the last 50 years, and the attitudes are pretty "as usual".