@BarryDead "If the funds aren’t earmarked, the agencies can spend the money any way they see fit. That is, the executive branch, rather than Congress, will determine how the taxpayer’s money is spent. " This is why Dr. Paul earmarks, then turns around and votes against it (transparency)...hence more earmarks. Get it? That deserves a thumbs up.
Glenn Beck told his half yesterday but didn't bother telling Ron's half of the story. This is what makes Glenn so dangerous. Half and partial truths.
I agree with what Ron is saying here, but he didn't do a very good job of articulating his position. He has a bad habit of leaving thoughts and sentences unfinished, and then running them all together (especially when he gets riled up). I still think he is the best politician in Washington, despite his lack of eloquence.
There's a serious flaw in the logic of all of the people who are saying, "If Ron Paul opposes earmarks then he shouldn't put them in bills."
Ron Paul wants to stop earmarks across the nation. He does NOT want to stop earmarks in one district but let them continue in others. So he puts the earmarks for his district in, WITH ALL THE OTHER districts' earmarks, and then encourages congressmen to vote against them. Stop it all, not take the fall while others continue. Think about it!
@pssvreported Your logic is wrong to.. It's like saying I'll keep doing cocaine so I can continue repore with addicts. Ron Paul is a politicial so he is full of shit.
You guys put this nut up on a pedestal for what cause he votes "no." I'm glad no Libertarian will ever get anywhere near the White House..
Eliminating earmarks doesn't reduce spending. It just means that the money that would have been earmarked goes to the Executive branch to do with as they see fit, usually spend abroad building bridges in Iraq rather than being spent on our own people.
Eliminating earmarking does not but getting rid of lying politicians like rp does. He spent 400 million $ in texas while claiming to be against the government spending. Pathetic. Then he cuts the taxes of the rich and big oil, bankrupting the nation.
Ron's stance here is that the money shouldn't have been taken in the first place, so how is it hypocritical for him to try to get some of it back in a way that's transparent to the american people? Think, people, think!
True, stop believing in confidence men. Rp spent 400 million tax$ in his district even though he's against government spending. Listen to him spin. He does not support the cra or the civil war. He is not a racist. Listen to him spin. With age you will hopefully recognize a liar. An arrdvark for truth.
Eliminating earmarks doesn't reduce spending. It just means that the money that would have been earmarked goes to the Executive branch to do with as they see fit, usually spend abroad building bridges in Iraq rather than being spent on our own people.
Josh, for rp to say that an issue could have been solved with cash is disingenuous. Slavery was deeply rooted in the south. They would rather break from the union. Rp believes in big government spending. These are the words that should leave his mouth. Their should be no tax cuts until th budget is balanced. Rp gop broke america.
Earmarking is apportioning money and it's a congressional provision. If a legislator dosen't like a spending bill he has the right to earmark. Why would he allow the executive branch to spend money from taxpayers in his district? His job is to represent the people right? It also creates transparency that prevents corruption. Educate yourself troll!
Quest, Let's keep score, rp is not a racist but said the civil war should not hve been fought and the cra is wrong. He is for small govt but crammed 65 earmarks for 400 million into legislation. He is libertarian, but belongs to gop. He blames the fed for national debt but cuts taxes for big oil and spends like mad. How do you spell fraud? Ron paul
The Civil War took the lives of 600,000 Americans. If you look at percent of population, that would be like having a war now that killed over 40 MILLION people. Ron Paul's main stance is that the war was unconstitutional and that the slaves could have been freed through better means.
Congress is supposed to delegate how money is spent, and Ron Paul is merely fighting for a portion of that money for his district. It's what his constituents elected him for.
Quest, I am a businessman with one alias. Arrdvarks. Most businessmen with power feel the way I do. I have had a slow week and have been able to educate some and infuriate others. You benefit by having a boss explain why it will not change. I helped feed 25 families of workers last year. How many did ron help? None. His policies would hurt the common man.
Quest, Mpol, I'm a truthsayer been bit in the face by the myth that is ron paul. I liked it when he compared an earmark to a tax rebate. Lol That dude is more confused than a feather in a whirlwind. He only has one oar in the water, rowing in circles. His elevator does not stop on all floors. He does not have a full deck. Lol
Convoluted logic, how true. He is a charletan and confidence man. His statement an earmark is like a tax credit is the stupidest thing yet from his mouth. The rp gop cut taxes on large corps. And rich donors. They then spend like hell under cover of earmarks are tax credits. Lol. They bankrupted america. Thinks gop rp.
"Well, I voted to not get pizza, but since you already have my money, and there's nothing I can do about that, I might as well state my preference for the pizza that comes. It's the only way I'm going to get the best use out of the money I've lost. I'd much rather keep the money and not have the pizza, but to avoid the pizza out of principle is simply cheating myself."
When it comes time to order, the gang collects they money from everyone, including Ron. Ron says he brought food, so he didn't think he should pay. Tough luck, Ron... we all voted, and you're paying. "Fine," says Ron, "But I want a white pizza with onions."
"Wait, you said you didn't want pizza! Are you going to be having pizza with us now? Isn't that a bit hypocritical?"
let me explain this, so a simple mind like yours can understand.
Let's say you and your college buddies are hanging out in your mom's basement playing some D&D. It's getting late, and everyone is getting hungry. Ronnie says he doesn't want to get dinner, since he brought a hoagie, but everyone else wants to order pizza. Ron is outvoted and they decide to order pizza.
The "convoluted logic" is on the part of CNN/Russert. Ron Paul says the system is rotten because a ton of money goes to Washington which then has to be fought over to get it back to the individual (after, of course, being picked over by the buzzards). He's being accused of buying a stolen watch... except the watch belonged to his district. A better system is to keep the lion's share of tax revenue in the state, or better yet the county or city.
Wow really? Did that just happen? I used to think Russert wasn't half bad, but after this show of close minded thinking I can't stand him now (well not now but my view on him) This war on intellect is just outrageous Russert doesn't have a clue how congress works, and would rather suck off his Wall Street Journal.
Ron Paul is right. He just doesn't articulate his point in a way that people immediately get. It would be taxation without representation if he did not earmark for his district. The money is going to be spent and the people in his district are going to be taxed for it. It is his duty to ensure that their tax dollars go back to them.
If the media collectively bashes someone, you must think, maybe this guy has something here . I understand the media's agenda. We continue to have problems with our political system b/c the people who watch these shows just go with the flow. Wake up!
The Constitution gives Congress the ability to decide where money is spent, and that's where Ron Paul wants to keep it. If there were no earmarks, than the Executive branch would decide where all those billions would be spent.
If you don't want a dictator in the White House, then Congress must retain the power of the purse, as the Constitution mandates. Earmarks are the means by which Congress controls the money.
Thank you Ron Paul. How about the part where Ron Paul voted against the bill. The only reason he earmarked the bill is because Ron Paul wanted the money to go somewhere that it will be used if it did get passed. Ron Paul is not against earmarks (earmarks are made to show where the money is going. I would rather have every dollar in the bill earmarked) What happens to the money that isn't earmarked. Remember he is against the bill right off the bat.
its like being against income taxes, and then someone calling you a hypocrite because you "benefit" from the tax system when you deduct a business expense from your income. It makes no sense, and this fat interviewer should be made to put his head between his butt cheeks for a few hours.
I understand Ron Paul's reasoning. If the Congress is going to spend the money anyway, you may as well see to it that your district gets a specific allocation of money. If the president gets the money, he can give it away to some idiot war contractor or some foreign government. I'd rather see that money spent in a way that benefits most Americans.
He explained it, but Tim was very biased in thinking he had a 'gotcha', which he didn't.
If Dr. Paul, or any representative, doesn't earmark money to be spent out of the budget, that money goes to the executive branch for them to spend, but rest assured it gets spent. I wish my rep's were better at getting my money back for me too. I mean would you purposfully hire a tax accountant with a history of missing tax breaks?
I don't understand the issue here. Ron Paul is a congressman not the president. He has to become part of the system to change it. What would you have him do Tim? He can't just drop the money and run away. His main responsibility is to take care of the tax-paying people of his congressional district. As long as the system remains the way it is today I will continue to expect to get what I pay for.
That's the worst thing CNN, with all their vast resources could come up with? Nothing but another clear demonstration that there's no dirt on Ron. Consistent, honorable, impeccable integrity in spite of working within a corrupt system. He's doing the best he can working amongst sleezy liars and idiots.
Ron Paul his best as senator for his district. That was his job and these guys are basically reminding him that he did it well. As President of the United States, he would do everything in his power and without hinderance to restore the freedom of his country. The majority of congress doesn't support his views because they have nothing to benefit personally from them. People who are honest and not corrupt don't generally make it far in politics.....yet. Times is changing. Viva La Revolucion!
thank goodness for the internet and you tube because this sort of sleazy tv, is why we are in a recession, people see this shit and believe it. fuck you to hell cnn
I don't think it's fair to hold Ron Paul's earmarks solely responsible for all of the debt built up when the Republicans took over the Congress. The Republicans were ALL spending like there was no tomorrow.
My man, there you go again: Republican/Democrat battle, it's irrelevant, they all go have a drink at the same bar just like the prosecuting/defending attorney's. It's just a game created for distraction which keeps the CFR members always up to bat.
Hello people...Dr. Paul votes no to the earmarks because he doesn't believe in them...but since he knows the money will get spent anyway then of course he allocates them to his constituents...Jesus, who wouldn't do the same thing. Would we rather the money get spent by the executive branch on Halliburton and rebuilding Iraq or spent at home to the people you represent. CNN is trying to discredit Dr. Paul here but they need to examine the other candidates equally.
what this is really telling aside from MSM being a propaganda arm of govt, is the utter stupidity of so called "experts" who have no idea what an earmark is, or how it works. luckily, 99% of RP supporters understand the process.
Ron Paul's constituents are still paying taxes into the pool of money that the representatives are dividing among themselves.
The money is going to be spent regardless. The question is, will you (voted in by the people back home) speak up and reserve a small portion of the funds that your district so desperately needs for projects, maintenance, rebuilding, preservation, etc.?
If you do not do so, then your constituents will essentially be paying for other states/areas projects or needs.
Wow Ron Paul is SO corrupt! He creates Earmarks, knowing he will vote against them, but also knowing they will pass! He games the system. He increases the national debt as badly as the next guy! What a Hypocrite!
Break the Bank! Break the Bank! Atleast maybe we then can get back to our Morals. People that Bottom feed understand Morals more, then those that Think they are Better then the Rest of the World! Break the Bank!
its has been discovered that Ron Paul HAS paid the income tax. He says he is against the income tax but yet he has been caught red handed paying it!!! Someone notify the MSM ASAP!!
If all earmarks were eliminated we would not necessarily save a single penny in the federal budget. Because earmarks are funded from spending levels that have been determined before a single earmark is agreed to, with or without earmarks the spending levels remain the same. Eliminating earmarks designated by Members of Congress would simply transfer the funding decision process to federal bureaucrats rather then elected representatives.
America made the tragic error of putting Republicans in charge of all three branches of government and then, to repay them, Republicans tried to drive middle-class Americans into bankruptcy / slavery-by-debt while cutting taxes on the super-rich and SPENDING LIKE A DRUNKEN SAILOR.
After all of their promises, all of their pretty lies, it turns out that Republican Congressmen are fiscally irresponsible.
Look I'm not going to do the Republican/Democrat crap since we all know there is NO difference, however, Clinton NEVER balanced the budget, stop watching mainstream TV and do some reading please.
Presidents do not balance the budget, Congress does, hey I don't pander to either party but the fact on Clinton from 1992 to 2000:Spending increased by 29-49% while tax revenues increased by over 85% This is the reason for the "surplus" Clinton did however add the Social Security overage to the pot, so now SS is paycheck to paycheck. Figures don't lie but liars figure I guess.
Before Congress goes with a hundred miles of the Federal Budget, the President of the United States submits a completed budget to Congress for their modifications.
This initial budget is written entirely by the President.
What was so shocking about Ronald Reagan's budgets was that he did not submit a balanced budget EVEN ONCE in his eight years to Congress.
The strengthen the economy by giving fathers and mothers the tools they need to keep their children safe and healthy and strong, and to educate them for a world where there is nothing more important than being able to teach yourself new things.
Wherever parents have legitimate needs, Democrats try to help.
Quote from Clinton when asked after his term exactly how he balanced the budget: "There are three fundamentals to eliminate a deficit; increase tax revenue,decrease spending,do a combination of both.With an increase in tax revenue thanks to the Reagan era, I could pretty much sit back and relax but it did take a little effort on both Congress and my parts."
It is important to note that it looks as though RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVES who spent the last forty years arguing that the national debt was fiscally irresponsible are now going to spend the next forty years arguing that eliminating the national debt would be fiscally irresponsible.
RIGHT-WING AMERICAN CONSERVATIVES STAND FOR *****NOTHING*****!!!
When Jefferson was in a much more rational mood, he made an infinitely more intelligent point:
"Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter."
--Thomas Jefferson
No newspapers means no democracy. It's as simple as that.
Thomas Jefferson was a candidate for President of the United States and NEWSPAPERS were reporting that he had a BLACK CHILD (which turns out to have been true).
Why on earth are you campaigning on behalf of being uninformed???
My assumption is that uninformed voters might vote for my candidates' OPPONENTS!!!
If you want to help Ron Paul, post this link everywhere you can think of! You can see this FREE MOVIE from Arron Russo titled America: Freedom to Fascism at:
Remove all spaces!
h t t p : / / video.google. com / videoplay?docid =-1656880303867390173
If you can't get the link to work, just google: America: Freedom to fascism and click on the link that says watch video!
Every district in America currently gets federal money. Should he deprive his constituents only? He has an obligation to make sure they are represented, and they are.
A man of principle recognizes the necessity to use what little good can be squeezed out of the sytem while trying actively to change it. Those who possess logic and a little common sense see no dichotomy, it is the lunatic absolutists who can't bend enough to see truth.
What is inconsistent is that Ron Paul WIDELY publicizes his votes against Federal money for his own district and, even here!, scrambles to cover up his earmarks actively TAKING Federal money.
Big contributors have read up on what earmarks are. Have the voters?
Earmarks are secret anonymous requests that Federal government SPEND MORE MONEY.
It's hilarious to see how all of you spin whats is completely obvious to those who are able to think critically. Ron P. is a good man, but there's no denying he is hypocritical on this point. It doesn't make him a bad man, it just proves he's a politician too. FTR-Russert goes after candidates from both parties and isn't singling out Paul. You can claim otherwise but you're being willfully ignorant of his history and the facts.
Russert is a very dumb man. He, and most in the media, don't care about political & economic theory. They are only interested in the he/said she/said type of political gotcha games.
He's way out of his depths w/ Ron. Look at him weakly say, "this is the wallstreet journal". Wow, that's pretty damning stuff there.
"It doesn't cut any spending to vote against an earmark." Get it Tim?! Passage of a bill & earmarking are 2 different things. Learn before you smear.
Russert has staff members who help with research. Ron Paul has staff members who help with research. George Bush, Jr. has the entire Bush Administration.
A man is judged by the final product regardless of how many people worked together to put it together.
As you yourself imply, Russert's questions are consistently outstanding.
His extraordinary staff is precisely the reason Ted Kennedy has achieved so much in his years of service to this nation. His three older brothers gave their LIVES fighting for our freedom.
Excellence is . . . sometimes . . . a group effort.
Are they suggesting that his tax-paying constituents don't have a right to request that money that is taken from them in taxes be used for their district because Paul is against the system that took it from them? Who has the convoluted logic here?
My last response was toward CildLeftBehind. And there's so much more I want to say, but in short, we as communities and neighbors to communities need to be responsible. THAT, will bring about real meaningful change, not federally forced "tolerance."
There's a million random Americans. Know how Ron Paul sees them all? As individuals! Not as groups, nor males, or females, not this religion, or that. He cares about your individual rights and the rights of states, for better or worse - to learn. If harm comes to an American, than their American rights are being broken and Ron Paul will NEVER stand for that, EVER.
Just goes to show, the mainstream media will twist anything in a time of need. They don't care how hypocritical they are. Again, they are counting on all the lazy egotistical idiots in this country, to soak up this crap like it's gospel.
WTF is Russert talking about... Ron should stop participating in the legislative process?
An earmark directs money that has all ready been spent (appropriated). If Congress passes an appropriations bill with 0 earmarks the exec. branch agencies get a blank check to spend money wherever.
When exec. branchers (and media goons) bitch about earmarks, it's usually 'cause they want the blank checks.
Not bad, after months and months, the FIRST sign of convoluted logic from Ron Paul, says CNN. When one looks a little harder, it's not convoluted! Keep looking CNN!
Appropriating the money is a better way to spend the money than to have the executive branch spend it into one of their various money holes. Who knows where our money goes with those agencies and programs?
MSM must feel very threatened to go so far as to try to make a leader look bad for trying to bring money already taken back to his people. Robin Hood indeed.
He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.
He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year. Mr. Reporter does not understand the system I see. He is clearly against the system. However if there are earmarks, this means this is money that is put aside. Not extra you morons.
Earmarking != Pork. Ron Paul's earmarks adds no expenditure to the federal government, it's simply allocating money already set aside to be spent in the local districts. Pork is when EXTRA money is added to the budget to spend money in the districts that would not have otherwise been spent.
His people lose money to the government via taxes. He would prefer it doesn't get spent and go back to them, but thats not an option.
He would rather since it is getting spent to give some back to his own people, instead of getting spent to Alaska on bridges to nowhere. He votes against all the spending bills, thus if all congressman were like him, the budget would be much smaller, and taxes could be much lower.
CNN is Ted Turner's baby. Turner thrives on conflict and war. He is very likely starting to feel threatened by Ron Paul's message of peace and prosperity for all.
Ron Paul votes against hundreds of billions of dollars worth of spending, but they bug him about $400 million that his constituents want. The tax dollars have been taken, they're sitting in Congress' wallet. If Ron doesn't send it somewhere, it's gonna go somewhere else, like Iraq, or some stupid pet project. I'd rather have Texas shrimp than from a foreign country. Ron's helping domestic farmers.
If they are going to take the money, why not put it into your district? He votes against it anyway and the money does go into america and not a bridge to nowhere! The media is getting scared & grasping at straws.
None of this matters because he votes down the bills anyway once they get into the hands of other congressman who continually modify the bills and fill them with special interests.
This is a system which he must work within. As he said, the money goes to executive if he doesn't earmark. #2, he would leave the money with the taxpayers if he could.
As long as Dr. Paul is getting press coverage, he will get this sort of questioning and twisted , spun logic. thankfully, I believe most people know what Dr. Paul is saying and wonder why Rustard doesn't get it.
Ron Paul is Tom Delay just with a better defense. pay to play politics at its worst. How come Paul isn't doing anything drastic to stop the war? Whys je just kissin babies and shaking hands while our soldiers are dying everyday. His platform is to end the war but right now hes doing nothing in the house to get republicans to stop filibustering the democrats attempt to cut spending. having his cake and eating it too.
Because he stands almost alone in Congress. He knows that most in the House are bought and paid for by the Powers That Be. This is why Ron Paul wants to become not only President, but Commander in Chief;)
stands alone in congress? you mean stands alone on the republican side. Tim Ryan, Kucinich, Conyers, Leahy, Byrd ALL DEMOCRATS that are TRULY AGAINST THE WAR!
He's running for president and voting against all the spending in order to stop the war. How the hell could you possibly suggest he's not doing anything? He's the most outspoken critic of the war and you think he's not doing enough!? What are you doing to stop the war?
You kidding me? Democrats want this war as much as the Republicans! The politicians in washington are getting fat off the land. Democrats get money to fund their socialist programs and Republicans get money to empire build. F#ck! What happened to the Republican party, it used to stand for something now it's just hand in hand and pigs at the troth.
well how come Ronalds not doing more to expose that? Mike Gravel has taken the democrats head on and the republicans and this is the thanks he gets. You people aren't even paying attention. Mike Gravel enlisted in the army. Ron Paul was drafted. Mike Gravel ended the Draft. Ron Paul looked up womens skirts for 20 years. Mike Gravel created the Alaskan pipeline. Ron Paul became a congressman and voted "NO" on everything except his precious earmarks
All Ron Paul does is to get money back for his constituents that the Fed stole in the first place! Who doesn't want some of their stolen money back??? Oh, probably those same ignoramuses who thi there is something "fair" about a "fair tax"? The Revolutionary War soldiers are rolling over in their graves about Americans who have fallen in love with paying taxes.
He did a pretty good job under fire. The truth is, there is no inconsistency and the social security and tax examples are perfect. We want to abolish the IRS, that doesn't mean that we don't take IRS money in the form of tax credits and refunds. It is not disingenuous to want to work to get rid of social security while still collecting ss benefits. It's your money in the mean time.
This is the best analogy I've seen for this situation yet. Ron Paul is ideologically opposed to this system, but he still has an obligation to this system. CNNs reporting was awful, but so was Meet the Press'. They too are a corporate slave, and they actually took more time to try and slander Paul. I don't support Ron Paul, but I hate Media crap like this.
from my understanding an earmark is kind of like a foodstamp, it's something that can only be exchanged for particular goods and services, RP is saying that the tax has been taken, and the money has been spent, so his constinuents' money is gone, by taking the earmarks for his district he's trying to give his constituents their money back in the form of earmarks.
the interviewer is saying, if you get robbed, and you take the TV and sterio that was bought with the money they stole from you, you're somehow endorsing robbery.
"Well well well, you didn't want to get robbed, but you were more than happy to take that TV and Sterio weren't you, hypocrite!"
Those scum bags are terrified, They fight everything he says in a desparate attemp to make him look bad. Not Gonna Work! 80% of American Adults have some sort of Internet access and the Mainstream Media viewership is imploding! I hope it is a different world after the 2008 elections and not business as usual. Go Ron Paul!
I love it... LOL he brushes Tim away and laughs at him..lol RON PAUL 2008! I can't even believe Tim would try to make it that Paul is supporting the system that is already corrupt by trying to get the people some of their money back.
Just goes to show, the mainstream media will twist anything in a time of need. They don't care how hypocritical they are. Again, they are counting on all the lazy egotistical idiots in this country, to soak up this crap like it's gospel.
In the same way, welfare functions exactly as a tax credit. Those on welfare still must pay the income tax. The welfare they receive is a credit against the income taxes they pay.
The point is the never-ending truckload of PORK heading to Washington; Ron Paul uses this technique to keep money with those who earn it.
It's a loophole, but he's upfront on how and why he uses it.
The mainstream media are spinning so hard they are going to blow all credibility that they have. They got nothing on Ron Paul so they are grasping at strings here. People can see right through it.
this interview doesn't mean jack. everybody supporting ron paul already knows the major media is corrupt. it's basically expected at this point. ron paul supporters get their information from the internet anyway
Comment removed
granolanutpunch 1 week ago
i say screwed reporting
0aiwas0 2 months ago
Asking for money that the people are asking back. Sounds logical. Instead of giving it to the legislative give back to the people.
duvexy 3 months ago in playlist More videos from researchris2
Dr Ron Pork Paul plays the system and spews BS...........squeaky old fart
BarryDead 4 months ago
@BarryDead "If the funds aren’t earmarked, the agencies can spend the money any way they see fit. That is, the executive branch, rather than Congress, will determine how the taxpayer’s money is spent. " This is why Dr. Paul earmarks, then turns around and votes against it (transparency)...hence more earmarks. Get it? That deserves a thumbs up.
Glenn Beck told his half yesterday but didn't bother telling Ron's half of the story. This is what makes Glenn so dangerous. Half and partial truths.
EndTheFedRes 3 months ago
Comment removed
BarryDead 4 months ago
Play by their rules until you can change them.
brad238899 9 months ago
the shrimp industry sounds better than halliburton.
sciencemunk 1 year ago
stupid media. and this is where so many people get their news. turn off the cable, enlighten yourselves
scott04la 2 years ago
I agree with what Ron is saying here, but he didn't do a very good job of articulating his position. He has a bad habit of leaving thoughts and sentences unfinished, and then running them all together (especially when he gets riled up). I still think he is the best politician in Washington, despite his lack of eloquence.
Metalloveica 2 years ago
i can see and relate to you opinion....
that aside, it is our responsibility to self educate and understand these issues.
researchris2 2 years ago 2
There's a serious flaw in the logic of all of the people who are saying, "If Ron Paul opposes earmarks then he shouldn't put them in bills."
Ron Paul wants to stop earmarks across the nation. He does NOT want to stop earmarks in one district but let them continue in others. So he puts the earmarks for his district in, WITH ALL THE OTHER districts' earmarks, and then encourages congressmen to vote against them. Stop it all, not take the fall while others continue. Think about it!
pssvreported 2 years ago
@pssvreported Your logic is wrong to.. It's like saying I'll keep doing cocaine so I can continue repore with addicts. Ron Paul is a politicial so he is full of shit.
You guys put this nut up on a pedestal for what cause he votes "no." I'm glad no Libertarian will ever get anywhere near the White House..
702decatur 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
hahahaha! RON PAUL!!!!!!!!!!!!! :)
peaceful way to protest against 9/11 and the nwo.
you can protest to 100's of people a day just by painting 9/11 was an inside job! on the side of your car.
it doesn't hurt them
you don't need a fucking liscence to do it.
check out my video response to see my idea. if you check it out i hope you like it. :)
qweqqweqbt 2 years ago
Eliminating earmarks doesn't reduce spending. It just means that the money that would have been earmarked goes to the Executive branch to do with as they see fit, usually spend abroad building bridges in Iraq rather than being spent on our own people.
FishlegsJones 2 years ago
Eliminating earmarking does not but getting rid of lying politicians like rp does. He spent 400 million $ in texas while claiming to be against the government spending. Pathetic. Then he cuts the taxes of the rich and big oil, bankrupting the nation.
arrdvarks 2 years ago
Ron's stance here is that the money shouldn't have been taken in the first place, so how is it hypocritical for him to try to get some of it back in a way that's transparent to the american people? Think, people, think!
antivert 2 years ago 8
True, stop believing in confidence men. Rp spent 400 million tax$ in his district even though he's against government spending. Listen to him spin. He does not support the cra or the civil war. He is not a racist. Listen to him spin. With age you will hopefully recognize a liar. An arrdvark for truth.
arrdvarks 2 years ago
Eliminating earmarks doesn't reduce spending. It just means that the money that would have been earmarked goes to the Executive branch to do with as they see fit, usually spend abroad building bridges in Iraq rather than being spent on our own people.
antivert 2 years ago 3
Comment removed
truevoice08 2 years ago
Josh, for rp to say that an issue could have been solved with cash is disingenuous. Slavery was deeply rooted in the south. They would rather break from the union. Rp believes in big government spending. These are the words that should leave his mouth. Their should be no tax cuts until th budget is balanced. Rp gop broke america.
arrdvarks 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Earmarking is apportioning money and it's a congressional provision. If a legislator dosen't like a spending bill he has the right to earmark. Why would he allow the executive branch to spend money from taxpayers in his district? His job is to represent the people right? It also creates transparency that prevents corruption. Educate yourself troll!
truevoice08 2 years ago
Quest, Let's keep score, rp is not a racist but said the civil war should not hve been fought and the cra is wrong. He is for small govt but crammed 65 earmarks for 400 million into legislation. He is libertarian, but belongs to gop. He blames the fed for national debt but cuts taxes for big oil and spends like mad. How do you spell fraud? Ron paul
arrdvarks 2 years ago
The Civil War took the lives of 600,000 Americans. If you look at percent of population, that would be like having a war now that killed over 40 MILLION people. Ron Paul's main stance is that the war was unconstitutional and that the slaves could have been freed through better means.
Congress is supposed to delegate how money is spent, and Ron Paul is merely fighting for a portion of that money for his district. It's what his constituents elected him for.
joshuammeyer 2 years ago 5
Quest, I am a businessman with one alias. Arrdvarks. Most businessmen with power feel the way I do. I have had a slow week and have been able to educate some and infuriate others. You benefit by having a boss explain why it will not change. I helped feed 25 families of workers last year. How many did ron help? None. His policies would hurt the common man.
arrdvarks 2 years ago
Quest, Mpol, I'm a truthsayer been bit in the face by the myth that is ron paul. I liked it when he compared an earmark to a tax rebate. Lol That dude is more confused than a feather in a whirlwind. He only has one oar in the water, rowing in circles. His elevator does not stop on all floors. He does not have a full deck. Lol
arrdvarks 2 years ago
Convoluted logic, how true. He is a charletan and confidence man. His statement an earmark is like a tax credit is the stupidest thing yet from his mouth. The rp gop cut taxes on large corps. And rich donors. They then spend like hell under cover of earmarks are tax credits. Lol. They bankrupted america. Thinks gop rp.
arrdvarks 2 years ago
"Well, I voted to not get pizza, but since you already have my money, and there's nothing I can do about that, I might as well state my preference for the pizza that comes. It's the only way I'm going to get the best use out of the money I've lost. I'd much rather keep the money and not have the pizza, but to avoid the pizza out of principle is simply cheating myself."
quest2k 2 years ago
When it comes time to order, the gang collects they money from everyone, including Ron. Ron says he brought food, so he didn't think he should pay. Tough luck, Ron... we all voted, and you're paying. "Fine," says Ron, "But I want a white pizza with onions."
"Wait, you said you didn't want pizza! Are you going to be having pizza with us now? Isn't that a bit hypocritical?"
quest2k 2 years ago
You hit the nail on the head, sir!
antivert 2 years ago
let me explain this, so a simple mind like yours can understand.
Let's say you and your college buddies are hanging out in your mom's basement playing some D&D. It's getting late, and everyone is getting hungry. Ronnie says he doesn't want to get dinner, since he brought a hoagie, but everyone else wants to order pizza. Ron is outvoted and they decide to order pizza.
quest2k 2 years ago
The "convoluted logic" is on the part of CNN/Russert. Ron Paul says the system is rotten because a ton of money goes to Washington which then has to be fought over to get it back to the individual (after, of course, being picked over by the buzzards). He's being accused of buying a stolen watch... except the watch belonged to his district. A better system is to keep the lion's share of tax revenue in the state, or better yet the county or city.
bluetablepainting 3 years ago
Wow really? Did that just happen? I used to think Russert wasn't half bad, but after this show of close minded thinking I can't stand him now (well not now but my view on him) This war on intellect is just outrageous Russert doesn't have a clue how congress works, and would rather suck off his Wall Street Journal.
Swampshack 3 years ago
Ron Paul is right. He just doesn't articulate his point in a way that people immediately get. It would be taxation without representation if he did not earmark for his district. The money is going to be spent and the people in his district are going to be taxed for it. It is his duty to ensure that their tax dollars go back to them.
theDrewid 3 years ago 3
If the media collectively bashes someone, you must think, maybe this guy has something here . I understand the media's agenda. We continue to have problems with our political system b/c the people who watch these shows just go with the flow. Wake up!
high5flyer 3 years ago
Glad we don't have to see this fat bastard on TV anymore.
BeethovenWannabe 3 years ago
I was as pissed at Russert for this as you, but that is way out of line...
I was actually sad when Russert died.
BecketTheHymnist 3 years ago
The Constitution gives Congress the ability to decide where money is spent, and that's where Ron Paul wants to keep it. If there were no earmarks, than the Executive branch would decide where all those billions would be spent.
If you don't want a dictator in the White House, then Congress must retain the power of the purse, as the Constitution mandates. Earmarks are the means by which Congress controls the money.
Dirtfire 3 years ago
Thank you Ron Paul. How about the part where Ron Paul voted against the bill. The only reason he earmarked the bill is because Ron Paul wanted the money to go somewhere that it will be used if it did get passed. Ron Paul is not against earmarks (earmarks are made to show where the money is going. I would rather have every dollar in the bill earmarked) What happens to the money that isn't earmarked. Remember he is against the bill right off the bat.
nicholaswells 3 years ago
Dr. Paul is 100% correct!
voteDRNO 3 years ago
Of course it's skewed. The same people who own the Federal Reserve bank own the big media.
That's why they try so hard to make the most honest, logical, Constitutional politician look lame.
He is a fucking CONSTITUTIONAL PATRIOT.
One of the very few left.
agentc73 3 years ago
its like being against income taxes, and then someone calling you a hypocrite because you "benefit" from the tax system when you deduct a business expense from your income. It makes no sense, and this fat interviewer should be made to put his head between his butt cheeks for a few hours.
dleddy1414 3 years ago
He's dead actually
ThuggLyfe 3 years ago
the media hated ron paul
dartfrog731 3 years ago
I understand Ron Paul's reasoning. If the Congress is going to spend the money anyway, you may as well see to it that your district gets a specific allocation of money. If the president gets the money, he can give it away to some idiot war contractor or some foreign government. I'd rather see that money spent in a way that benefits most Americans.
MishuTaste 3 years ago 8
@MishuTaste I get it. If someone is going to rape your wife / girlfriend it might as well be me.
BarryDead 3 months ago
He explained it, but Tim was very biased in thinking he had a 'gotcha', which he didn't.
If Dr. Paul, or any representative, doesn't earmark money to be spent out of the budget, that money goes to the executive branch for them to spend, but rest assured it gets spent. I wish my rep's were better at getting my money back for me too. I mean would you purposfully hire a tax accountant with a history of missing tax breaks?
brewerscrew 3 years ago 4
Besides that those earmarks are a penny in a jar of quarters. We spend money on needless wars but can't help our own people?
Daningram18 3 years ago
I don't understand the issue here. Ron Paul is a congressman not the president. He has to become part of the system to change it. What would you have him do Tim? He can't just drop the money and run away. His main responsibility is to take care of the tax-paying people of his congressional district. As long as the system remains the way it is today I will continue to expect to get what I pay for.
Daningram18 3 years ago
I don't know, Ron does seem a little inconsistent here but even if hes is.....WOW! BIG FUCKING DEAL! He is still RON PAUL.
UcanbeGOD 3 years ago 3
That's the worst thing CNN, with all their vast resources could come up with? Nothing but another clear demonstration that there's no dirt on Ron. Consistent, honorable, impeccable integrity in spite of working within a corrupt system. He's doing the best he can working amongst sleezy liars and idiots.
realistate 3 years ago 4
Ron Paul his best as senator for his district. That was his job and these guys are basically reminding him that he did it well. As President of the United States, he would do everything in his power and without hinderance to restore the freedom of his country. The majority of congress doesn't support his views because they have nothing to benefit personally from them. People who are honest and not corrupt don't generally make it far in politics.....yet. Times is changing. Viva La Revolucion!
JaySupreme1982 3 years ago
mainstream anchors are like overconfident 7 year olds when they speak, except for olbermann who may be at high school debate team level..
aznboi1107 4 years ago
thank goodness for the internet and you tube because this sort of sleazy tv, is why we are in a recession, people see this shit and believe it. fuck you to hell cnn
just vote for ron paul
hematite1 4 years ago
Thats the problem!! I do get it!
BarHamelech 4 years ago
I don't think it's fair to hold Ron Paul's earmarks solely responsible for all of the debt built up when the Republicans took over the Congress. The Republicans were ALL spending like there was no tomorrow.
ReliableInsider 4 years ago
My man, there you go again: Republican/Democrat battle, it's irrelevant, they all go have a drink at the same bar just like the prosecuting/defending attorney's. It's just a game created for distraction which keeps the CFR members always up to bat.
Peace.
DABIGRAGU1 4 years ago 2
Peace.
You and I both believe this country can do better.
ReliableInsider 4 years ago 2
Ditto.
DABIGRAGU1 4 years ago 2
yes....correct.
JaySupreme1982 3 years ago
Hello people...Dr. Paul votes no to the earmarks because he doesn't believe in them...but since he knows the money will get spent anyway then of course he allocates them to his constituents...Jesus, who wouldn't do the same thing. Would we rather the money get spent by the executive branch on Halliburton and rebuilding Iraq or spent at home to the people you represent. CNN is trying to discredit Dr. Paul here but they need to examine the other candidates equally.
jimmytigg 4 years ago 3
what this is really telling aside from MSM being a propaganda arm of govt, is the utter stupidity of so called "experts" who have no idea what an earmark is, or how it works. luckily, 99% of RP supporters understand the process.
RosenKrantz666 4 years ago
RosenDrantz: Priceless! You're good!
DABIGRAGU1 4 years ago
Ron Paul's constituents are still paying taxes into the pool of money that the representatives are dividing among themselves.
The money is going to be spent regardless. The question is, will you (voted in by the people back home) speak up and reserve a small portion of the funds that your district so desperately needs for projects, maintenance, rebuilding, preservation, etc.?
If you do not do so, then your constituents will essentially be paying for other states/areas projects or needs.
nzalud2 4 years ago
Where do the earmarks go if they don't pass?
atheistnarnia 4 years ago
Wow Ron Paul is SO corrupt! He creates Earmarks, knowing he will vote against them, but also knowing they will pass! He games the system. He increases the national debt as badly as the next guy! What a Hypocrite!
BarHamelech 4 years ago
Don't quite get it do you.
DABIGRAGU1 4 years ago
Thats the problem!! I do get it!!
But Ron Paul doesn't!!
BarHamelech 4 years ago
He voted no on his he's earmarks.
ctech689 4 years ago 2
Break the Bank! Break the Bank! Atleast maybe we then can get back to our Morals. People that Bottom feed understand Morals more, then those that Think they are Better then the Rest of the World! Break the Bank!
Budvb 4 years ago
BREAKING NEWS SHOCKING TRUTH ABOUT RON PAUL
its has been discovered that Ron Paul HAS paid the income tax. He says he is against the income tax but yet he has been caught red handed paying it!!! Someone notify the MSM ASAP!!
P8TR10T 4 years ago
Because it would be ILLEGAL for a REPUBLICAN Congressman NOT to spend your hard-earned money like a drunken sailor.
ReliableInsider 4 years ago
If all earmarks were eliminated we would not necessarily save a single penny in the federal budget. Because earmarks are funded from spending levels that have been determined before a single earmark is agreed to, with or without earmarks the spending levels remain the same. Eliminating earmarks designated by Members of Congress would simply transfer the funding decision process to federal bureaucrats rather then elected representatives.
btbblack 4 years ago
Passing the Federal budget (in the U.S.) is a multi-step process.
Making a ham sandwich is a multi-step process.
EARMARKS ARE SPENDING.
And not spending in the abstract. They are spending by individual members of Congress.
ReliableInsider 4 years ago
America made the tragic error of putting Republicans in charge of all three branches of government and then, to repay them, Republicans tried to drive middle-class Americans into bankruptcy / slavery-by-debt while cutting taxes on the super-rich and SPENDING LIKE A DRUNKEN SAILOR.
After all of their promises, all of their pretty lies, it turns out that Republican Congressmen are fiscally irresponsible.
ReliableInsider 4 years ago
Democrats are way better... are you high?
atheistnarnia 4 years ago
Reagan - ended up with huge debt
Bush - ended up with huge debt
Clinton - ended up with a balanced Federal budget
Bush, Jr. - bigger debt than ever
ReliableInsider 4 years ago
Look I'm not going to do the Republican/Democrat crap since we all know there is NO difference, however, Clinton NEVER balanced the budget, stop watching mainstream TV and do some reading please.
DABIGRAGU1 4 years ago
He actually balanced two budgets.
The last two budgets in his second term.
Clinton's budget surpluses give the lie to everything Republicans have been claiming for the last forty years.
Are you saying that reality has a liberal bias?
Could be.
ReliableInsider 4 years ago
Look at the table of National Debt as a fraction of GDP.
The debt ALWAYS goes DOWN as a fraction under DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTS and it ALWAYS goes UP under Republicans.
The only exception has been Eisenhower.
Republicans are FISCALLY IRRESPONSIBLE.
ReliableInsider 4 years ago
Presidents do not balance the budget, Congress does, hey I don't pander to either party but the fact on Clinton from 1992 to 2000:Spending increased by 29-49% while tax revenues increased by over 85% This is the reason for the "surplus" Clinton did however add the Social Security overage to the pot, so now SS is paycheck to paycheck. Figures don't lie but liars figure I guess.
DABIGRAGU1 4 years ago
Before Congress goes with a hundred miles of the Federal Budget, the President of the United States submits a completed budget to Congress for their modifications.
This initial budget is written entirely by the President.
What was so shocking about Ronald Reagan's budgets was that he did not submit a balanced budget EVEN ONCE in his eight years to Congress.
ReliableInsider 4 years ago
*within
ReliableInsider 4 years ago
So Reliable, which CFR candidate are you voting for?????
DABIGRAGU1 4 years ago
When you say that what made it so easy for CLINTON to balance the budget in the 1990s was THE DEMOCRATIC ECONOMY . . . you're right!
Newt "recession as far as the eye can see" Gingrich turned out to be dead wrong and had to resign in a sex scandal as Speaker of the House.
ReliableInsider 4 years ago
Well since you're hell-bent on playing the Dem/Rep game, how does the Democratic Party help the economy HISTORICALLY?
RAISE TAXES.
DABIGRAGU1 4 years ago
The strengthen the economy by giving fathers and mothers the tools they need to keep their children safe and healthy and strong, and to educate them for a world where there is nothing more important than being able to teach yourself new things.
Wherever parents have legitimate needs, Democrats try to help.
They put in a dollar and get 1000% return.
Investment!
Investment in our own children.
ReliableInsider 4 years ago
Quote from Clinton when asked after his term exactly how he balanced the budget: "There are three fundamentals to eliminate a deficit; increase tax revenue,decrease spending,do a combination of both.With an increase in tax revenue thanks to the Reagan era, I could pretty much sit back and relax but it did take a little effort on both Congress and my parts."
cherrielane 4 years ago 3
en . wikipedia . org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms
ReliableInsider 4 years ago
It is important to note that it looks as though RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVES who spent the last forty years arguing that the national debt was fiscally irresponsible are now going to spend the next forty years arguing that eliminating the national debt would be fiscally irresponsible.
RIGHT-WING AMERICAN CONSERVATIVES STAND FOR *****NOTHING*****!!!
ReliableInsider 4 years ago
A video allegedly by one of Ron Paul's SUPPORTERS!
ReliableInsider 4 years ago
As far as I know, Tim Russert has been THE most NON-partisan interviewer with THE most relevant questions in all of television, for years!
ReliableInsider 4 years ago
When Jefferson was in a much more rational mood, he made an infinitely more intelligent point:
"Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter."
--Thomas Jefferson
No newspapers means no democracy. It's as simple as that.
ReliableInsider 4 years ago
On December 31, 2007, imagine thousands of Ron Paul supporters marching at the same time in every major city in the US! ronpaulmarch[dot]com
hewolfe 4 years ago
*The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers----Thomas Jefferson
*Advertisements contain the only truths to be relied on in a newspaper. ---Thomas Jefferson
*I do not take a single newspaper, nor read one a month, and I feel myself infinitely the happier for it----Thomas Jefferson
(I'm sure these could all be stated about the News on TV as well).
handofaces 4 years ago
handofaces,
Thomas Jefferson was a candidate for President of the United States and NEWSPAPERS were reporting that he had a BLACK CHILD (which turns out to have been true).
Why on earth are you campaigning on behalf of being uninformed???
My assumption is that uninformed voters might vote for my candidates' OPPONENTS!!!
ReliableInsider 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If you want to help Ron Paul, post this link everywhere you can think of! You can see this FREE MOVIE from Arron Russo titled America: Freedom to Fascism at:
Remove all spaces!
h t t p : / / video.google. com / videoplay?docid =-1656880303867390173
If you can't get the link to work, just google: America: Freedom to fascism and click on the link that says watch video!
dewboy910 4 years ago
how in the hell is it inconsistent?
Every district in America currently gets federal money. Should he deprive his constituents only? He has an obligation to make sure they are represented, and they are.
A man of principle recognizes the necessity to use what little good can be squeezed out of the sytem while trying actively to change it. Those who possess logic and a little common sense see no dichotomy, it is the lunatic absolutists who can't bend enough to see truth.
bitterpill23 4 years ago 3
What is inconsistent is that Ron Paul WIDELY publicizes his votes against Federal money for his own district and, even here!, scrambles to cover up his earmarks actively TAKING Federal money.
Big contributors have read up on what earmarks are. Have the voters?
Earmarks are secret anonymous requests that Federal government SPEND MORE MONEY.
Why the secrecy? Why the anonymity?
SUNSHINE is the best disinfectant.
ReliableInsider 4 years ago
It's hilarious to see how all of you spin whats is completely obvious to those who are able to think critically. Ron P. is a good man, but there's no denying he is hypocritical on this point. It doesn't make him a bad man, it just proves he's a politician too. FTR-Russert goes after candidates from both parties and isn't singling out Paul. You can claim otherwise but you're being willfully ignorant of his history and the facts.
Amalgamutt 4 years ago
disgusting....
ronpaulflash 4 years ago
i agree with paul. if you are taxed by the government then you should actually be able to get something out of it.
majors77 4 years ago 5
Russert is a very dumb man. He, and most in the media, don't care about political & economic theory. They are only interested in the he/said she/said type of political gotcha games.
He's way out of his depths w/ Ron. Look at him weakly say, "this is the wallstreet journal". Wow, that's pretty damning stuff there.
"It doesn't cut any spending to vote against an earmark." Get it Tim?! Passage of a bill & earmarking are 2 different things. Learn before you smear.
cfbastiat 4 years ago 5
I agree. Russert = Puppet You think HE "digs" up all that info? Is that the best they can do to smear Ron Paul? The man is a true statesman!
RP 08!
240sxmachine 4 years ago
240sx,
Russert has staff members who help with research. Ron Paul has staff members who help with research. George Bush, Jr. has the entire Bush Administration.
A man is judged by the final product regardless of how many people worked together to put it together.
As you yourself imply, Russert's questions are consistently outstanding.
ReliableInsider 4 years ago
And they're not the only ones.
ReliableInsider 4 years ago
continuing . . .
His extraordinary staff is precisely the reason Ted Kennedy has achieved so much in his years of service to this nation. His three older brothers gave their LIVES fighting for our freedom.
Excellence is . . . sometimes . . . a group effort.
ReliableInsider 4 years ago
Are they suggesting that his tax-paying constituents don't have a right to request that money that is taken from them in taxes be used for their district because Paul is against the system that took it from them? Who has the convoluted logic here?
bxblox 4 years ago 5
My last response was toward CildLeftBehind. And there's so much more I want to say, but in short, we as communities and neighbors to communities need to be responsible. THAT, will bring about real meaningful change, not federally forced "tolerance."
RevoluionOmni 4 years ago
HEY RUSSERT, U STAY SAFE.
JamJHolmes 4 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
against the civil war
against the civil rights act
against the voters rights act
Now that is my type of racist
CildLeftBehind 4 years ago
There's a million random Americans. Know how Ron Paul sees them all? As individuals! Not as groups, nor males, or females, not this religion, or that. He cares about your individual rights and the rights of states, for better or worse - to learn. If harm comes to an American, than their American rights are being broken and Ron Paul will NEVER stand for that, EVER.
RevoluionOmni 4 years ago 2
First they ignore you.
Then they ridicule you.
Then they attack you.
Then you win.
We've moved up another notch.
Besides the Houston Chronicle has always attacked Rep. Paul, and not always honestly.
Ron Paul 2008. America forever.
trauts01 4 years ago 3
As Mark Twain said, "A lie can get around the world before the truth has a chance to put his boots on."
bammbamm12 4 years ago
Just goes to show, the mainstream media will twist anything in a time of need. They don't care how hypocritical they are. Again, they are counting on all the lazy egotistical idiots in this country, to soak up this crap like it's gospel.
WhyNotTruth 4 years ago
WTF is Russert talking about... Ron should stop participating in the legislative process?
An earmark directs money that has all ready been spent (appropriated). If Congress passes an appropriations bill with 0 earmarks the exec. branch agencies get a blank check to spend money wherever.
When exec. branchers (and media goons) bitch about earmarks, it's usually 'cause they want the blank checks.
762ForFreedom 4 years ago
Not bad, after months and months, the FIRST sign of convoluted logic from Ron Paul, says CNN. When one looks a little harder, it's not convoluted! Keep looking CNN!
porphyry77 4 years ago 2
Yeah, but most of the people that would actually buy this garbage don't even know what "convoluted" means. Don't worry about it.
selfTrust1 4 years ago
Appropriating the money is a better way to spend the money than to have the executive branch spend it into one of their various money holes. Who knows where our money goes with those agencies and programs?
adpierce1 4 years ago
MSM must feel very threatened to go so far as to try to make a leader look bad for trying to bring money already taken back to his people. Robin Hood indeed.
pootron 4 years ago 2
He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.
He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year. Mr. Reporter does not understand the system I see. He is clearly against the system. However if there are earmarks, this means this is money that is put aside. Not extra you morons.
L4k3rF4N 4 years ago
Earmarking != Pork. Ron Paul's earmarks adds no expenditure to the federal government, it's simply allocating money already set aside to be spent in the local districts. Pork is when EXTRA money is added to the budget to spend money in the districts that would not have otherwise been spent.
HYWT 4 years ago 3
Forced to defend???
Its the system that sucks.. you fkn tool.
sidrosteel 4 years ago 3
His people lose money to the government via taxes. He would prefer it doesn't get spent and go back to them, but thats not an option.
He would rather since it is getting spent to give some back to his own people, instead of getting spent to Alaska on bridges to nowhere. He votes against all the spending bills, thus if all congressman were like him, the budget would be much smaller, and taxes could be much lower.
azpennquaker 4 years ago 4
The Clinton News Network is a-scared.
JiveDadson 4 years ago 4
CNN is Ted Turner's baby. Turner thrives on conflict and war. He is very likely starting to feel threatened by Ron Paul's message of peace and prosperity for all.
It's really that simple.
healthhavencom 4 years ago 3
what a robin hood
hozehd 4 years ago
Ron Paul votes against hundreds of billions of dollars worth of spending, but they bug him about $400 million that his constituents want. The tax dollars have been taken, they're sitting in Congress' wallet. If Ron doesn't send it somewhere, it's gonna go somewhere else, like Iraq, or some stupid pet project. I'd rather have Texas shrimp than from a foreign country. Ron's helping domestic farmers.
MooseOfReason 4 years ago 2
If they are going to take the money, why not put it into your district? He votes against it anyway and the money does go into america and not a bridge to nowhere! The media is getting scared & grasping at straws.
eekdog2005 4 years ago 2
I'm so confused. I dont believe anyone understood what the hell they were just talking about.
mopuffy01 4 years ago
An earmark = tax credit for his district he represents. He's trying to help his people get some of their tax money back.
It's not like special interest and lobbyist money where they take money from you and spend elsewhere.
That is the difference.
Treveda 4 years ago
None of this matters because he votes down the bills anyway once they get into the hands of other congressman who continually modify the bills and fill them with special interests.
Treveda 4 years ago
This is a system which he must work within. As he said, the money goes to executive if he doesn't earmark. #2, he would leave the money with the taxpayers if he could.
Knowledge is power. Understand the system.
tondeaf 4 years ago
As long as Dr. Paul is getting press coverage, he will get this sort of questioning and twisted , spun logic. thankfully, I believe most people know what Dr. Paul is saying and wonder why Rustard doesn't get it.
Boomer1949 4 years ago
Ron Paul is Tom Delay just with a better defense. pay to play politics at its worst. How come Paul isn't doing anything drastic to stop the war? Whys je just kissin babies and shaking hands while our soldiers are dying everyday. His platform is to end the war but right now hes doing nothing in the house to get republicans to stop filibustering the democrats attempt to cut spending. having his cake and eating it too.
oldhacks 4 years ago
Because he stands almost alone in Congress. He knows that most in the House are bought and paid for by the Powers That Be. This is why Ron Paul wants to become not only President, but Commander in Chief;)
bwilson32 4 years ago
stands alone in congress? you mean stands alone on the republican side. Tim Ryan, Kucinich, Conyers, Leahy, Byrd ALL DEMOCRATS that are TRULY AGAINST THE WAR!
oldhacks 4 years ago
He's running for president and voting against all the spending in order to stop the war. How the hell could you possibly suggest he's not doing anything? He's the most outspoken critic of the war and you think he's not doing enough!? What are you doing to stop the war?
tarossi400 4 years ago
he could be doing a lot more. You just don't give a shit and just want to go along with the crowd. Like a herd of sheep.
oldhacks 4 years ago
You kidding me? Democrats want this war as much as the Republicans! The politicians in washington are getting fat off the land. Democrats get money to fund their socialist programs and Republicans get money to empire build. F#ck! What happened to the Republican party, it used to stand for something now it's just hand in hand and pigs at the troth.
Ron Paul is different, he's the real Republican.
soulmantim 4 years ago
well how come Ronalds not doing more to expose that? Mike Gravel has taken the democrats head on and the republicans and this is the thanks he gets. You people aren't even paying attention. Mike Gravel enlisted in the army. Ron Paul was drafted. Mike Gravel ended the Draft. Ron Paul looked up womens skirts for 20 years. Mike Gravel created the Alaskan pipeline. Ron Paul became a congressman and voted "NO" on everything except his precious earmarks
oldhacks 4 years ago
why you keep giving me thumbs down? dont like to hear the truth? You're all full of shit and have no idea what the hell you're talking about!
oldhacks 4 years ago
All Ron Paul does is to get money back for his constituents that the Fed stole in the first place! Who doesn't want some of their stolen money back??? Oh, probably those same ignoramuses who thi there is something "fair" about a "fair tax"? The Revolutionary War soldiers are rolling over in their graves about Americans who have fallen in love with paying taxes.
bwilson32 4 years ago 3
He did a pretty good job under fire. The truth is, there is no inconsistency and the social security and tax examples are perfect. We want to abolish the IRS, that doesn't mean that we don't take IRS money in the form of tax credits and refunds. It is not disingenuous to want to work to get rid of social security while still collecting ss benefits. It's your money in the mean time.
williamkostric 4 years ago 4
I was playing poker last night.
The rules were that the two were wild.
I did not like the rule.
According to meet the press I should never use the two for a wild card to support my case.
Yea Right
jonldavis 4 years ago 6
This is the best analogy I've seen for this situation yet. Ron Paul is ideologically opposed to this system, but he still has an obligation to this system. CNNs reporting was awful, but so was Meet the Press'. They too are a corporate slave, and they actually took more time to try and slander Paul. I don't support Ron Paul, but I hate Media crap like this.
NewfieBullett 4 years ago
i wish ron paul didn't act so defensive. he had nothing to defend, all he did was representing his district.
bo0jah 4 years ago 2
me too
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
Guys, Ron Paul is my authority! Anyhow, im from Poland and i couldn't find in any dict what 'eamarks' are. Could you tell me what does it mean?
Season Greetings and Wishful thinking *<|:-)
RageCoD2 4 years ago
from my understanding an earmark is kind of like a foodstamp, it's something that can only be exchanged for particular goods and services, RP is saying that the tax has been taken, and the money has been spent, so his constinuents' money is gone, by taking the earmarks for his district he's trying to give his constituents their money back in the form of earmarks.
luke666808g 4 years ago
the interviewer is saying, if you get robbed, and you take the TV and sterio that was bought with the money they stole from you, you're somehow endorsing robbery.
"Well well well, you didn't want to get robbed, but you were more than happy to take that TV and Sterio weren't you, hypocrite!"
luke666808g 4 years ago
Isn't it convolute in comparison with RP's arguments?
RageCoD2 4 years ago
Isn't it convolute in comparison with RP's arguments?
RageCoD2 4 years ago
An 'earmark' is a somewhat tentative plan for how to spend tax money. It is like saying "I plan to spend the money on this".
kevinabt 4 years ago
Those scum bags are terrified, They fight everything he says in a desparate attemp to make him look bad. Not Gonna Work! 80% of American Adults have some sort of Internet access and the Mainstream Media viewership is imploding! I hope it is a different world after the 2008 elections and not business as usual. Go Ron Paul!
ronhipner 4 years ago 2
Watch my video EXPOSING BILL KRISTOL THE SCUMBAG who called Ron Paul Anti-American !!!
just by clicking my name!
or just copy paste this youtube link[remove spaces]
youtube . com / watch?v=oWfeQ0i0TvI
VoteYourConsience 4 years ago
forgot to say
thank you researchchris
VoteYourConsience 4 years ago
I love it... LOL he brushes Tim away and laughs at him..lol RON PAUL 2008! I can't even believe Tim would try to make it that Paul is supporting the system that is already corrupt by trying to get the people some of their money back.
gold95 4 years ago
Just goes to show, the mainstream media will twist anything in a time of need. They don't care how hypocritical they are. Again, they are counting on all the lazy egotistical idiots in this country, to soak up this crap like it's gospel.
WhyNotTruth 4 years ago 2
In the same way, welfare functions exactly as a tax credit. Those on welfare still must pay the income tax. The welfare they receive is a credit against the income taxes they pay.
The point is the never-ending truckload of PORK heading to Washington; Ron Paul uses this technique to keep money with those who earn it.
It's a loophole, but he's upfront on how and why he uses it.
schausm 4 years ago
The mainstream media are spinning so hard they are going to blow all credibility that they have. They got nothing on Ron Paul so they are grasping at strings here. People can see right through it.
Ron Paul will win.
WTC7WasPulled 4 years ago
Watch my video EXPOSING BILL KRISTOL THE SCUMBAG who called Ron Paul Anti-American !!!
just by clicking my name!
or just copy paste this youtube link[remove spaces]
youtube . com / watch?v=oWfeQ0i0TvI
VoteYourConsience 4 years ago
I could not find "EXPOSING BILL KRISTOL" I did find ROn Paul says, but it didn't really teach me much about Bill.
gold95 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
? sorry gold I dont understand
VoteYourConsience 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
heres the video in question gold
remove the spaces from the link
watch it then go back and watch my video again and read on kristol & his father Irving kristol on wikipedia
youtube . com /watch?v=0rduigENzHo
VoteYourConsience 4 years ago
this interview doesn't mean jack. everybody supporting ron paul already knows the major media is corrupt. it's basically expected at this point. ron paul supporters get their information from the internet anyway
goody8504 4 years ago 5