After examining your comments further, I can see the confusion is even worse than I initially thought.
Say what you want but if you are against something then you are against it.
Yup ..... only problem is: if you are
not against something then you
aren't against it:
Ron Paul on Earmarks
Ron Paul, Don Young and Joseph Cao Ignore GOP Earmark Ban, Risk Reprimand
The problem with earmarks is they help run up the need for a larger budget the next year.
..... 'splain it to me .....
like I wuz a child .....
If RON PAUL really has no problem with using earmarks why does he always vote no on any spending bill.
Because if he did, he'd have to give up the rather snappy-sounding honorary title of "
Dr. No" ?
Why not just vote yes. Bet it has nothing to do with the fact he could no longer claim to be a fiscal conservative against big wasteful government spending.
Yeah ..... you got him all figgered out dontcha ?
You are not gonna change my mind about a guy who claims to be one of the only real fiscal conservative republicans in congress, yet is one of only four republicans to request earmarks in the 2011 in the amount of $157,093,544 after pledging along with the rest of the republicans not to.
Ahhh ... now you've gone and done it: using a
total falsehood and
complete misrepresentation of his actual position .... all to achieve political ends .... tsk, tsk, tsk:
"Paul is one of a handful of Members to publicly challenge the House GOP leadership by going forward with earmark requests just two weeks after the Republican Conference adopted a one-year moratorium on the spending practice. …
[Ron Paul] defended his decision to request projects, saying he needed to make sure his constituents benefited from their federal tax dollars. …
Paul said leaders were well aware of his opposition to the ban and his belief that earmarks increase transparency because the public can see where their federal dollars are being allocated.
“They asked me whether I would sign on to the moratorium, and I said no, it doesn’t fit my philosophy because I think we should designate every penny that we spend,” he said."
For bonus points, your
false assertion above about Ron Paul's "pledge" (remember - the one that never occurred ?) would be ______ ? (this one is multiple choice
)
A. An accepted, if fairly scummy, political tactic (at least in some circles)
B. Not a very bright move on your part
C. A blatant lie and perversion of the actual truth of the matter
D. Obama's fault
E. All of the above
