We’re only going to get $10 per resident. Maybe we should have included all those illegals in our population figures.
Oh, and here’s a tidbit sure to please you Campaign for Liberty types (you know who you are): The GOP’s king of the porkers is none other than Congressman Ron Paul.
On the House side, second-term Rep. Mazie Hirono, (D-Hawaii) secured the most earmark projects in the proposed spending bill, totaling $138 million. The top Republican is former presidential contender and self-proclaimed fiscal conservative Ron Paul, (R-Texas), who could stand to get $73.7 million in earmarks.
{ 77 comments }
Next Comments →
Buzz,
You’re kinda slow on the condemnation of Paul…
Jason, Daniel, and I (along with some others) have already been discussing it over at Jason’s site for a few days now…
I’ll never promote him again (if what you’re saying is true). I’m a member of his site, but have no problem canceling.
I have a feeling there is no honesty in politician’s campaigns. They say what they want to get the vote, then do what they want when they get in office.
Let’s see…who else did that? Oh yeah….”Yes we can.”
I look at this a bit differently. Congressman Paul is sort of the mirror image/opposite of Saxby Chambliss. Saxby completely disregarded the wishes of his constituents and “voted his conscience” by voting YES on the first bailout bill. Congressman Paul, on the other hand, listens to his constituents who elected him, and includs things they demanded as earmarks and then votes NO on the budget. He is totally consistent on taking a principled stand as a Congressman. I would not trade him for any of the other 534 members of congress. It isn’t his fault that the other Republicans display a complete disregard for the Constitution.
Congressman Paul has a respect for the Constitution that should be used as the litmus test for every other candidate who is running for the House or Senate. If they all voted like he does we would not have any of the problems we’re experiencing today.
Ramblin:
As I said on Jason’s post, though I disagree with Dr. Paul here and in fact have serious reservations about him over this, when it comes down to it, he is one of the best – if not THE best – currently on Capitol Hill and I’d rather have 534 more ppl like him than the 534 that are there now.
Buzz,
Did you actually read the report FoxNews linked to or did you simply take their word for it? I think it’s obvious.
http://www.taxpayer.net/resources.php?category=&type=Project&proj_id=1961&action=Headlines By TCS
Just like in the Bredesen post, I think an edit is necessary.
While I tend to disagree with Dr. Paul on many issues, I have tremendous respect for him. He’s one of the few politicians that can truly look past partisanship and do what he thinks is best for his constituents and his country. Instead of doing like many on both sides and pandering to the party, Dr. Paul puts the people he represents first.
I’m sure Buzz was itching to post something negative about Paul after seeing or hearing about Paul’s comments on D.L. Hughley’s show.
Hrmm I made a post before this linking to the what FoxNews mentioned in their article. Can someone check and see if it’s in the spam filter?
RuralDem,
I have no idea what Paul said because I’ve never watch Hughley’s show.
Take off you’re partisan-colored glasses and debate the issues for a change.
You guys are hilarious. You’ve got your Paul blinders on waaaay too tight (remember, stop tightening when you feel resistance).
He lands a zillion dollars in earmarks and you guys give him a pass, saying it’s ok because he’s a statesman? What crap. If this were Kingston, you’d be (rightfully) all up in his face about wasteful spending.
And this quote is completely laughable:
“He is totally consistent on taking a principled stand as a Congressman.”
The principled stand is NOT requesting any earmarks.
Ron Paul has always been for getting back some of the money from DC. He’s never disputed that. Always been a fiscal conservative, always above board, zero corporate “bundlers” a.k.a. “crooks and liars” funding his campaign, and completely against all bailouts and the most recent “Obamination” too as far as I know. As far as him standing to be the biggest winner, this could be a conspiracy to make him look bad.
I do find it funny how this is the biggest outrage among “conservatives” however:
Washington D.C.’s citizen could fair the best, with almost $1,000 allotted per person, much of it going to build a new headquarters for Homeland Security and $747,000 to remove driftwood from the Potomac River.
(Hell, I’ll go get the driftwood outta there for half that amount.)
“Congress may also be handing out $500,000 to The National Council of La Raza, a Latino rights group.”
Por que’? Or should I say “porque”?
Ron Paul will take home almost as much in pork as the entire Georgia Congressional delegation:
I learned a lot about Ron Paul last year. Believe me, the man isn’t all he is cracked up to be. I’m not saying he is a bad guy, I’m just saying that he leaves a lot to be desired considering that he has become the self-appointed spokesman for the Liberty Movement.
Someone who claims that Congress should abide by Article I, Section 8 while not actually doing it himself, shows a stunning of amount of hypocrisy.
Wouldn’t the funding for maintenance the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway be a traditional role for the Federal Government and National Defense, similar to it’s traditional role in funding the Interstate system?
http://www.defenselink.mil/dodcmsshare/briefingslide2450915-D-6570C-002.jpg
Buzz,
Try reading the report the coming back on here. Calling him the GOP’s “king of porkers” is simply a lie at the moment.
Partisan? I do not think I defended any Democrat. You’re really losing it.
It’s hard to debate an issue when the numbers are there and instead of looking at the page for yourself, you simply take what FoxNews says as pure fact. And you call me partisan? Hahahahhha.
The principled stand is listening to the people who sent you there and doing what they ask instead of what you, the elected official want. The fact that he gets reelected time after time by people who know for certain that he will not vote for the pork they’re asking him to bring back should tell you something.
I’ll freely admit that I don’t have time to crunch the numbers and prove Fox News wrong. Since you clearly do, show us where the Fox News article is wrong RuralDem.
How Ron Paul works:
Step 1: Ron Paul requests zillions of dollars in earmarks.
Step 2: Many of the earmarks are inserted into approps bills.
Step 3: Ron Paul votes against said approps bills.
Step 4: Approps bills pass anyhow, and Ron Paul’s district gets its projects.
Step 5: Ron Paul rides off into sunset on brilliant white steed, integrity intact and supporters none the wiser.
Crunch what numbers? The information is on the link I gave you Buzz.
The list is still being updated and edited (which you failed to acknowledge)
Let’s break it down by category:
A) Paul’s solo earmarks numbers are 11 earmarks totaling $14,877,750. Just browsing over the list, Phil Gingrey’s solo number is 7 earmarks totaling $31,540,250. Robert Aderholt’s solo number is 20 earmarks worth 5,192,000. Gingrey’s amount is much higher, and Aderholt’s number of earmarks is much higher.
B) Paul’s solo numbers combined with other members is 20 earmarks worth $73,799,750. Rodney Alexander’s numbers are 56 earmarks worth $120,730,563. Alexander’s numbers are much higher.
C) Paul’s numbers in the third category (solo other members President) are 24 earmarks totaling $95,831,750. Rodney Frelinghuysen’s numbers are 30 earmarks totaling $173,385,750. Mario Diaz-Balart’s numbers are 20 earmarks totaling $239,769,450. Ed Whitfield’s numbers are 16 earmarks totaling $192,648,575.
Need more examples? Check the link I posted in my other post.
Sounds more like you’d rather ignore the information and spew whatever you think sounds good, whether its right or not.
Fox News said:
You say they’re wrong, and finally posted data to back up your claim. Now folks can make up their own minds. “We report, you decide.”
Buzz Brockway said:
“The GOP’s king of the porkers is none other than Congressman Ron Paul.”
It’s not true.
Forgive me for not inserting the words “in the House.” The quote I posted made it clear they were talking about who got the most money in the House.
Your real issue is with Fox News’ reporting of the story. Take it up with them.
Um, all of those members I posted about are in the House, so I’m not sure what you’re talking about.
My issue is with you posting the article from FoxNews and then being shown the article is wrong and still standing by what it says.
Good grief.
I posted what Fox News said. I don’t have time to go fact check every article I link to. You dispute what Fox says and posted other information. Hallelujah!
“I don’t have time to go fact check every article I link to.”
Wow, clicking one link is really that difficult? They even gave you the link in the article you posted.
Amazing.
They don’t need him to vote for it since budgets generally pass without much of a problem, the omnibus is an exception to the rule.
He can request pork and let the majority in Congress do his work for him.
Take it up with Fox News RuralDem.
Nice to know that you’re a fan of facts Buzz.
Oh, wait….
RuralDem,
Take it up with Fox News.
So, here’s a question: If Ron Paul said “no” to the earmarks cominghis district’s way, where would that money go? Would it be returned to the taxpayers?
…”returned to the taxpayers?”…LOL! I crack myself up! Obama and Pelosi ain’t gonna ever “return” ANYTHING to taxpayers.
“Saxby completely disregarded the wishes of his constituents and “voted his conscience” by voting YES on the first bailout bill.”
I’d love to see proof that he got more calls from constituents against the bill than he got in favor of the bill.
“I’d love to see proof that he got more calls from constituents against the bill than he got in favor of the bill.”
Saxby admitted that the calls coming to his office were 100:1 AGAINST. Why would he admit that if it was not the truth knowing how much trouble it was going to be for him?
When did he say that?
Paul’s constituents ask him to place the earmarks in the bill, which he does because he REPRESENTS them. It is the taxpayer’s money. But once said bill goes up for a vote, he shoots it down. I actually trust his integrity and don’t believe that he votes “No” b/c he knows it will pass. I believe that he is merely doing his job by listening to his constituents.
Ann Coulter was asked about this before. The issue is not that new:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fyC36Yk3B8
Starts at minute 1:06 and lasts til minute 2:53
Dr. Paul has voted against more spending and wasted government than any other individual currently in Washington D.C.
Here’s another link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myzBUWazSTc&feature=related
I still don’t see why Ron Paul should be getting a black eye for wanting to repair damage from Hurricane Ike or maintenance for the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway. Of course the NEOCONS would probably rather put up a toll booth on the sea Route and sell it off to China or Dubai. This is what makes K-street happy.
K Street is a major thoroughfare in the United States capital of Washington, D.C. known for the numerous think tanks, lobbyists, and advocacy groups that exercise influence from its location.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K_Street_(Washington,_D.C.)
It is amazing how supporters of Ron Paul manage to compromise everything they supposedly believe to defend the Cult.
The creation of the Intracoastal Waterway was authorized by the United States Congress in 1919. It is maintained by the United States Army Corps of Engineers. Federal law provides for the waterway to be maintained at a minimum depth of 12 ft (4 m) for most of its length, but inadequate funding has prevented that.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intracoastal_Waterway
Do you agree with everything Congress does? Some politicians believe it’s a national security interested to support farm subsidies.
Jason,
Since we don’t believe we should have to collect signatures to get our candidates on the ballot, is it a compromise to then go out and get those signatures?
Working to change the rules while playing by them, I don’t see as a compromise.
Paul wants less taxes and less spending, but as long as DC continues to take our money and spend it on special projects, more power to Paul for bringing some of it back to his constituents.
He has from day one stated this was his purpose with introducing these earmarks and has never tried to hide it… Buzz and others act as if this is some sort of “gotcha” and I won’t support their effort. This has nothing to do with a “cult” mentality.
When the other republicans stop spending, taxing, begging and spending some more (like they’re doing in GA)… or Paul votes yes on one of the bills, then I’ll reconsider. But by comparison to most of the other GOP elected officers, Paul still leads by a large margin in being a constitutional fiscal conservative and therefore, I’ll continue to defend him.
A case could that Georgia is a loser here.
The money has been allocated, it isn’t going to not be spent. Other states get better roads (or whatever it is spent on) and instead Georgia gets no money.
Don’t Republicans believe in trickle-down economics? Isn’t it possible that that money in Georgia could trickle down?
“Paul still leads by a large margin in being a constitutional fiscal conservative and therefore, I’ll continue to defend him.”
So you believe that there are degrees to actions and it is possible to say “I may not agree with someone 100% but it is more than I agree with the opposition?”
Paul wants less taxes and less spending, but as long as DC continues to take our money and spend it on special projects, more power to Paul for bringing some of it back to his constituents.
How does that jive with your belief in the limitations placed on Congress in Article I, Section 8. It’s not a very principled stance to take for someone who claims to rely so much on principle.
This has nothing to do with a “cult” mentality.
Yeah right. Ron Paul can do no wrong in your eyes, just like the Fair Tax’ers refuse to listen to any criticism of Tax Hike Mike.
Jason,
I do offer criticism for Dr. Paul. I dislike pork and wasteful spending. Earmarks should only be necessary to be used. But I do believe that Ron Paul is someone who needs to be at the helm of the GOP and help get back to principle. He did vote against every earmark while listening to his constituents.
Of much greater concern in the days ahead are government’s intervention in the marketplace and the deterioration of the USD by the Federal Reserve System.
Do you agree with everything Congress does? Some politicians believe it’s a national security interested to support farm subsidies.
Hell no! Ideally just roads bridges, infrastructure, waterways used for commerce and national defense, ect… Oil too. Let’s get government out of the oil business. Right now we’re pumping oil into the strategic petroleum reserve and we’ve just discovered a VERY LARGE RESERVE in North Dakota/Montana. In fact it’s difficult to get government from playing both sides of an issue, especially when panic and fear and lobbyists are involved.
http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7010615007
He did vote against every earmark while listening to his constituents.
He also went to the House Appropriations committee, the “favor factory” (a name given by Jack Abramoff), and requested millions in pork. That does not jive with the principles he claims to hold.
Some of you defending Paul, have also criticized other Republicans for their pork, yet when someone calls out your hero, you suddenly forget what you believe.
Don’t try to shift the topic.
At least I don’t THINK I’m in a cult. I can’t even get along with the RP supporters on this blog.
And I happen to be pro-choice too unlike Dr. Paul who is an avid pro-lifer. But the arguments here are actually rather tame compared to some of the BITCH SLAPPING that goes on in the c4L or other RP websites. 
Ain’t that how it’s supposed to be when everybody has their own opinion?
Jason, I’m not your average Paul supporter at all. I did just criticize him for putting them in the bill to begin with. He should’ve only done that if the earmarks were necessary. I also voted for John McCain in the General Election, while many other Paul supporters followed Dr. Paul’s advice to vote Third Party.
Sadly, nobody is perfect. Ron Paul just happens to be one-of-the-better politicians in Washington D.C.
Jason,
Answer to your question… one votes “no” on these spending bills.
As for criticism of Paul… I have quite a few, but they pale in comparison to most of the other GOP/DNC Reps.
A question for Buzz,
Where is/was the outrage for Georgia’s GOP delegation and the last 8 years of introducing earmarks and voting yes or the outrage of just about every tax increase proposed in this years session in GA has come from the hands of GOP reps?
As long as you keep attacking Paul, you show the un-willingness of the GOP leadership to change their ways… So I guess, since the LP in GA continues to benefit, Thanks, is in order.
Sorry, Daniel, it doesn’t work that way.
Tyler, do you know why earmarks get so much opposition? There are two reasons. First of all, in most cases, it’s unnecessary spending that Congress has no business funding. The other is the process in which they are inserted into spending bills. There is no real oversight, cost-benefit analysis or committee hearings on these pork projects.
You can read a column I wrote about earmarks here.
Next Comments →
Comments on this entry are closed.