Ron Paul tries to defend his earmarks

12/23/07. More about this clip here:

http://www.thedailybackground.com/2007/12/23/video-ron-paul-struggles-to-defe...

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Ron
• Paul
• Repulican
• Presidential
• Candidate
• 2008
• White
• House
• Race

[ChampaignLibertarian]

The whole earmark controversy is a non-issue, a smokescreen to divert attention away from real issues.

We need a politician's or group of politician's fingerprints on all spending items so you, the media, can both challenge and inform. Omnibus budget bills should be banned.

In addition, many federal legislators rightly believe that those tax dollars retrieved for their constituents in the form of earmarks from the federal government should not have left their state in the first place.

[GoLuckyOops]

Ron Paul is very much against taxing. And when we are taxed, he works to know how that money is spent, and wants to make sure it goes back to the people. This earmark spending is dwarfed by all the congress spending that Ron Paul has consistently been against. I want to know where spending is going, I want out of control spending and the national deficit reduced, and Ron Paul does everything he can for the people and to speak out. I have never seen a congressman who has voted so consistently

[darris321]

*and succeeds

lol

[tehdouglas1]

wheres the whole clip?

[lomocan]

@reg12269

Whatever *facepalm*

[reg12269]

@lomocan on a last note, keep wondering if the ron pauls of the world will still value the rights of the state +the individual approach at the fed level when non-whites are the ones in power in most states in the next 20 years.

[reg12269]

@lomocan my other beef with paul is with his conflicted discoherent political policies. he's a republican who wants to be their nominee yet he is pro-homosexual choice, pro-drug legalizn, pro-stem cell research, anti-death penalty (cant trust the govt for that but lets have them protect fetuses) +anti-abortion choice. i agree with the first 3. GOP mainstream only agrees with the last. he may as well decide pragmatically as he has on earmarks to accommodate one side or the other in order to win!

[reg12269]

@lomocan PT2. the constitution is sacred but because someone interprets in in a different way doesnt make them activist or anti-constitution. to me being anti-abortion politically makes one in favor of activist judges and circumvents the intent +will of the constitution. on economics, i accept the basic premise of the constitution. regarding small taxes +govts, i lean more towards the ron pauls +against the obamas. for social policy, i like little intrusion from govts +lean to the obamas!

[reg12269]

@lomocan PT1. u work for the paul campaign? i like mr. paul. he was the one who introduced me to ayn rand. heard of him back in 1995 when was running as a libertarian in NH for president. i love most of his private issue policies. his abortion stance IMO is another conflict that he goes along with for political purposes. whats more sacred to an individual than what comes in their womb. how anyone can be for big government for an unborn child than call themselves small govt is almost comical!

[lomocan]

@reg12269

If you think there shouldn't be a "pious take" on Constitution then that effectively means that govt are free to do whatever they want & become dictators; it's the document that's supposed to allow people to control govt & if there's something missing, it CAN be amended.

As for gay-rights, Ron doesn't tihnk govt has any power to dictate it as it's an issue of mutual contracts & individuals are free to choose.

Anyways, you're not making any point.

[reg12269]

@lomocan u make good points but enough of the pious take on the constitution. like the bible MOST of what we do today is not in the constitution. oh yep, because the constitution does not specifically talk about homosexual rights, they should never have it, right? although "we the people" could mean all citizens incl blaks once congress made it so, again radical constitutionalists push the same ole song. everyone believes in the constitution. some see it as a living doc +some like paul don't!