Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

Ron Paul on EARMARKS.....please don't miss his point

Posted By: it's called wasteful spending!.....MsMT on 2009-03-11
In Reply to:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fq_5H1XKVww&eurl=http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/


Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

Yup, you still miss the point...oh well....nm

Did you miss the point?
Without government interference, there would never have been subprime loans in the first place! The banks couldn't afford them!!! Now, that is correctness!
You really did miss my whole point entirely.
I didn't defend alcohol being legal. I said, in effect, "Do two wrongs make a right?"

I'm sorry you wasted all those keystrokes.
I did not miss your point at all
You either love all men as God teaches or you don't. I don't think God says to love them all - except for this group or that group. Nope, God says to love ALL men. There are no exceptions to that.
You still miss the point that 48% of the country....
don't see Obama as the leader you see and have no faith that he can "change" anything for the better. He talks a lot of "unite" but not much about "compromise." He wants to bring US to HIS side, not meet us in the middle. His whole career has been that, his voting record has been that. What, I ask you, is there other than his word for it that he means to change anything other than taking everything we the 48% believe and demolishing it so that nothing remains but HIS view? Where is ANY tangible proof of that? He is immovable on abortion and extreme far left radical on it. He means to change the face of the supreme court and remove all semblance of conservatism. He does not want to "unite" conservatives, he wants conservatives to become liberals. As do his followers...it is readily apparent from the posts you read here. No one here is interested in uniting anyone, unless you adopt their thoughts, their values, their vision. If you don't, you are an ignorant redneck and so many other colorful adjectives I can't name them all.

So you tell me...where in anything Obama says does a conservative find hope for compromise or positive "change?" Please direct me there.

As to party rubble...not a republican...that party left me a long time ago. I personally think the party system is divisive and I think the idea of only 2 candidates reeks. But...oh well. The powerful higher-ups know the more candidates you have, the harder to get a majority...and they don't want that.

Oh well...off my soapbox. In closing...very simple. If Obama truly does start to "compromise" in his effort to "unite" then I might really believe he is reaching out to those of us who don't trust him. Until then...just words.
I didn't miss the point - I have been a McCain supporter
I have been on this board arguing over and over why McCain is the better choice. I used to support Obama until a few weeks ago after he beat out Hillary and then all this stuff about his life and the people he associates with (forget Rev. Wright- I could care less about that little dweeb), but his affiliations with the worst of the worst, his voting record, his lies about how he will not tax us, yet has consistently voted to raise taxes on who? The middle income (around $42,000 - if you would call that middle income anymore). His not cutting back on any of the programs he wants to fund. The list goes on and on and on about what I don't like about Obama.

As for McCain - I think he's a decent guy. I think he's way more decent than many of the politicians in Washington. I think he has always been on the side of the people and has shown that by consistently arguing against both dems and pubs if it doesn't benefit the people. I strongly supported the ticket mainly because of Palin. She is certainly one of the most qualified out of the other 3. She has consistently balanced the budget as governer, cut back pork filled bills, stopped wasteful spending, and has done nothing but good things for the people of her state and I believe that will carry over if the republicans win.

I was so expecting a really good debate and believed Gov. Palin helped him tremendously with her outstanding debate outcome, so was expecting nothing but good with McCain. There were so many issues people were talking about with what McCain would need to do to win the debate. I didn't see any of it last night and left me wondering, who does he meet with before debates and speeches and does he listent to any of them. To me his performance last night was so bad shuffling around the stage. I was sitting here typing and heard loud and clear McCain say "that one" not only saying it, but the tone of his voice just hit a raw nerve with me. DH and I just looked at each other and shook our heads. As I stated earlier I was very disappointed as I have been on this board arguing over and over and over for McCain and against Obama. But I don't know what was worse. His saying "that one" or him overusing "my friends". Why hasn't anyone told him to knock it off. He uses it in almost every single sentance he says. Like I say, I got disgusted and turned off the debate. Right now I don't care anymore who wins the election. I'm voting for the constitutional party, if I do even vote at all.
No, Duck, not made up, and you fail to miss my point...
I think the dems are missing a LOT of points with Obama's plans for us...
Yes and 60% of the earmarks

were from the dems.  Both sides suck as far as I am concerned!  If you are going to comment and bash the pubs for their 40%....at least be thorough and report the dems and their 60%.  Now we have President Obama who said that he would not sign anything with earmarks in it and that he would read every line, etc........now that he is pres.....he seems to be whistling a different tune. 


There are 8,500 earmarks in that bill costing us around 810 billion dollars.  As far as I am concerned.....both dems and pubs know where they can go because I tired of this crap!  They are all crooks.  They are all out for their own special interests.  They are hurting us more than helping us.


So it is 100% earmarks? NM
x
You know your candidate....look up his earmarks...
A million to the hospital his wife works for after they nearly doubled her salary. Yep, he is against those pesky earmarks. The bridge to nowhere was a huge one. He is Washington politics as usual. There is no change there.

Yes, he is careful with his votes. Voted against the Infants Born Alive act twice. Managed, with the 130 presents, to show up for what was important to him..denying medical care for an infant who managed to survive an abortion. yeah, there's something to be real proud of.
Look into Obama's earmarks...
particularly the one for Michelle's employer after they doubled her salary. No one in Illinois benefitted from that one other than the Obama family and her employer.
Earmarks explained. sm
The ones who vote for the spending bills are the bad guys. Ron Paul votes against all huge spending bills. The bill passes anyway and since it passes, he makes sure all his constituents requests are in there and by earmarking he is tagging the money and keeping track of where it goes. If it is not earmarked, it goes back to the executive like a blank check. By earmarking, he is maintaining a certain degree of transparency and accountability plus giving money the government looted from his constituents back to them.
Just like O saying "no earmarks," right? nm
xxx
Interesting comment on earmarks...

*** Edited by Moderator***


 


Please post URLs, not copyrighted materials or content from any other site.


 


wanna talk about earmarks?
Sarah Palin just this year sent 31 earmarks totaling $197 million (more per person than any other state submitted)... she requested even more than that in 2007. And she is one that is running on a ticket talking about NO PORK BARREL!

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2008154532_webpalin02m.html
You need to understand the difference in earmarks and...
pork barrel, first. Every state asks for earmarks. Pork barrel are earmarks that don't come through the normal channels...that congresspeople try to slap in the middle of a bill that will pass in order to get their "pork" through. Congress are the ones who do pork earmarks, and last time I looked, Sarah Palin has never been in Congress. Obama has, and Joe Biden has, and boy howdy...let's talk about earmarks. By the way, John McCain has asked for zip, zilch, nada.

Obama asked for a big one and his wife's employer and her salary got doubled. Coincidence? LOL. I think not.
Definition of Pork aka Earmarks
Just so we all know what pork (aka "earmarks") actually is:

http://www.earmarks.omb.gov
/earmarks_definition.html

From the Office of Management and Budget:

OMB defines earmarks as funds provided by the Congress for projects or programs where the congressional direction (in bill or report language) circumvents Executive Branch merit-based or competitive allocation processes, or specifies the location or recipient, or otherwise curtails the ability of the Executive Branch to manage critical aspects of the funds allocation process.

In other words, provisions added to a bill after the president has ratified the bill that direct funds to certain districts in exchange for promises made beforehand by the representatives from those districts to vote yes on said bill. These are the earmarks (or "pork") that McCain and Obama both campaigned against. This bill contains no pork (yet) because they just passed it.

The GOP's definition of earmarks aka "pork": "Stuff we don't like."

Technically, the provisions in the bill that the GOP and others are calling pork (or earmarks) are not pork.
But he just signed a bill filled with earmarks???
x
8600 earmarks = 6 BILLION DOLLARS!
to that line by line lie Obama told when he wanted to be elected?  He hasn't looked at one page, let one line by line...... thanks to all who put such a thug and liar in office! 
No, the issue of transparency with earmarks did not escape me

but his reasoning was, at times, questionable. It appears as though he is going to take the money and run unlike some of his compatriots who are "attempting" to refuse stimulus money.


Earmarks Include:



  1. Add-ons. If the Administration asks for $100 million for formula grants, for example, and Congress provides $110 million and places restrictions (such as site-specific locations) on the additional $10 million, the additional $10 million is counted as an earmark.
  2. Carve-outs. If the Administration asks for $100 million and Congress provides $100 million but places restrictions on some portion of the funding, the restricted portion is counted as an earmark.
  3. Funding provisions that do not name a recipient, but are so specific that only one recipient can qualify for funding.

Stop the spending on stupid earmarks,
give the middle class some real tax cuts, and have some patience. Things aren't going to change overnight and they're not going to change by continuing to throw money at it every day.
Obama has no room to talk about earmarks....and neither he nor Biden...
have much room to talk about flip flopping. Ahem.
Obama lied to the country. "No earmarks"
nm
She said SOME or did you miss that? nm

Man!! I miss everything! nm

What did I miss? nm
12
I actually really like Ron Paul...

I plan to vote for Barack Obama (bash him if you want - I cannot be swayed!), but I checked out Ron Paul's website awhile back, and it seems like he has a pretty great record.  I wouldn't mind if he got elected.  I think both Obama and Paul seem to have one great quality in common - integrity!!  People can call me foolish if they want, but I go with my gut feeling a lot through life (serving me well so far), and I have a good feeling about both of these men.  They seem like decent, honest men - well, honest for politicians at least. :)


I like Obama because he talks about the things that mean the most to my family, and I really think he has what it takes to bring our divided nation back together somewhat, but if a Republican makes it to office, I hope it's Paul.


Exactly what Ron Paul has said over and
He has repeatedly tried to remind everyone of our constant intrusion into the middle east, invading their soil and they resent us for that. Oil, oil, oil is the reason and I am still amazed at how so many people still believe that is not the reason we're over there. Carter screwed up so bad decades ago and things have just gotten worse since. Obama doesn't know squat about middle eastern affairs and it scares me to death to think he could possibly be running this country one day.
Ron Paul.....
Not nominated because he went against everything the government bureaucracy wanted. He wanted VERY LIMITED government, NO taxes on individual citizens, do away with the IRS, stop taking away civil rights, NO national ID, free markets, and here's the kicker, return to SOUND MONETARY POLICIES. Now, that's why he wasn't nominated but look at the crap hole we're in now.

He never has gone alone with capitol hill's garbage and has stood up against them at every turn.

He has preached the coming of this very thing which we are bailing corporate greed's sorry butts out right now and they just scoff, smirk, and laugh at him.

I sat on this board and read harsh comments about him but yet most of them had to do with nothing more than his age. The very things they are screaming about now are the very things he warned again and again about and begged us to be involved in what is going on with our government and police THEM, not the other way around. But no, we end up with Obama and McCain. What a trade off.
Ya, then none of us would have to miss
That would just suck.
So, do you think Ron Paul is serious

candidate or just a wasted vote?  I'm not liking neither Obama nor McCain at this point, and I've been researching Ron Paul a little bit.  I don't know that I'm leaning towards him, just curious if he has a viable chance in this election. 


It seems worthless to vote for someone you know won't get enough of the votes to actually win the thing.  Any thoughts?  Does Ron Paul have enough supporters to get voted in?


Ron Paul
Yes, he has never veered one bit from his beliefs. He is not swayed by lobbylists and the good ole boy system... he has continued to try to speak for America but sadly enough to deaf ears. Everybody wants tax relief but when this man said he would do everything he could to get the IRS abolished, were there any takers? Yea, but not by the mainstream media. You rarely got to see him on there. At the very least, he would have given us a flat tax. I don't hear either candidate talking flat tax, which would be a very quick fix with lasting benefits. But, of course, that's too easy....government couldn't afford all the crap they're used to dishing up for us.
Did you miss something?
Yea, some moron found a you tube clip and her religion was an issue over and over ad nauseum in the media, of which I'm sure you paid attention to.

I have based my opinion on his background, not his color. He has a very very very questionable background, being brought up in Islamic faith. That's NOT a little thing. If you don't like the religious aspect of it, too bad. When Muslim belief says all who are not Muslim are to be killed, you better believe I pay attention. When I see one after another terrorist (even home grown) being his buddies, I'll pay attention and question why.

Dense and ignorant will ignore anything Muslim, because most liberals don't care about God anyway, but his real beliefs and upbringing that has been proven over and over again are a big concern for me.

You might open your eyes when or if he is in office and all those cabinet positions have to be filled and all you see are names you can't even pronounce, because they all have questionable citizenship to this country, questionable middle eastern relationships with those involved in terorrist organizations, etc.

Then you can wonder where this country is really going and maybe you'll have bigger fish to fry then.
Ron Paul
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ez5robAWmu4
No, I did not miss that -
I addressed that part when I said that people who would not pay taxes already do not pay taxes!

There are many, many people who never pay a penny into taxes and get $5000 to $6000 refunds every year for EIC. That is nothing new.
G20 by Ron Paul
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COtE1J5NMbo
MAN what did I miss???
:(
What'd I miss?
So I've been gone for a few days (almost a week I guess!)

Any good bits I need to check out? Hope you all had a great Thanksgiving! I think my eyes are orange from all the pumpkin pie I ate!!
So do I (miss sam)

I don't post very often anymore because of the same reasons. You're bashed constantly for your views. This is no longer a politics board as you said.


I'm at least willing to see what O does BUT, I caught a bit of his Phila. speech and he stated we need to change the Declaration of Independence. Huh? I hope I didn't hear that correctly.


I'm also sick of seeing all the garbage that's being pushed with his face on it, like he's some kind of God and how the whole world is going to tune into his inaugaration and celebrate. Saw where one woman in Kenya had a skirt on with his picture on it. It fit right over her butt. I got a kick out of that.


We do have someone, Ron Paul. sm
He is not a perfect public speaker, but he tells it like it is. During an interview with Cavuto, this guy said if he was an American he would vote for Ron Paul.
Yes, I miss her also...................nm
nm
Actually, was not a Ron Paul fan, but the more I
nm
Try not to miss me too much...(sm)
Gone on vacation.  Hope you all (even the ones that hate me...lol) have a good week    . 
didn't miss anything....
but I want to know why we haven't heard more of cronie Rove?  I knew that would be shoved under the rug as they are wanting that scandal will go away.  That's why the "early" nomination of Roberts.  So see-through they stink!
Neoconservatism, per Ron Paul.
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2003/cr0710033.htm
Vote for Ron Paul
He has my vote, too.
Voting for Ron Paul

Go Ron Paul!


Would love to see a true statesman like Ron Paul be President of our country.


A politician is a man who thinks of the next election; while the statesman
thinks of the next generation. -James Freeman Clarke
(1810-1888)


 

I am sure that even shocked Ron Paul. sm
I would say he has some fringe support. I do not think he has any control over that, but overall he is uniting people across parties, colors, ages, religions etc. Who else is doing that? Looking for idealistic youth, you will find a lot of them at Ron Paul rallies.

I do not like Tucker either. I have seen posts on other sites that MSNBC is going to or has fired him. Maybe he does not want to be a paid shill anymore. There is even a Save Tucker website.

http://www.savetucker.org/index.html
I supported Ron Paul too...but
Ron Paul is not in the race anymore. He was a good candidate and I was behind him 100%. Even he is in agreement with Barack on certain issues (no not all of them but some of them). And yes Hillary does need to step down. She will tear the party apart so much that we will be seeing a win for McBush. She has so much bad baggage attached to her that if she was to win the nomination McBush would win hands down over her. Yes everyone should be allowed to vote but we should also know that there will only be two candidates come election time. If anyone wants to write in someone else and not vote for McCain or Obama then its just a waste. If people think its going to make a difference it won't. Those votes will just go in the trash can.
For those who supported Ron Paul sm

Great article in the Rocky Mountain News. 



Ron Paul has performed a great service for the Republican Party


By Jeff Wright


Thursday, June 26, 2008



Largely unappreciated and attacked by his own Party Congressman Ron Paul has, in fact, done a great service to the Republican Party this election season. Paul enlarged the Republican ‘tent’ to again include disaffected core Republicans, Independents and real Conservatives who have been forced outside that ‘tent’ in the last two decades.


Paul uses classic Republican language to defend that point of view which demands small-government, constitutionally-oriented, fiscally-responsible and true free-market adherents actually be recognized and accommodated, rather than just paying lip-service to those positions.


Most importantly, that message has motivated a generation of young people to join the Party who are technically savvy, constitutionally-smart and extremely enthusiastic about spreading the message of freedom, liberty and free markets. They have been inspired by a candidate who really understands and believes in a Republic and, one would think, be embraced by incumbent Republican Party members.


However that, it seems, is not the case. Too many existing Republicans do not understand the language of those positions any more and can’t speak it in public. It also seems the NeoCon members are intent on forcing out of the party the very people that represent its future. I urge my Republican brothers and sisters to reject such collectivist, herd mentality which is indicative of Democrats while being logically and historically repugnant to Republicans.


In the 1960s and 70s that same “insurgent” group within the party was represented by Goldwater/Ronald Reagan conservatives. For those of you who don’t remember, the “Reaganites” were ostracized and isolated throughout that period right up to the 1980 election, when they were fully embraced. That is why in March of 1980, even former President Gerald Ford was still quoted as saying, “.....the Man is unelectable,” seven months before Reagan was elected President. It is worth noting that Congressman Paul was one of only 4 Congressman who endorsed Reagan in 1976.


However, the Goldwater/Reaganites were never treated as badly as the Paulites have been this season. The NeoCon/establishment faction within the Party has diligently worked to eliminate all true vestiges of the real Reagan Revolution from the party, as exampled by their behavior this election season. They have but one thought: Power and control at any cost. Yet, the record shows they keep losing running against historic principles of the Party.


They are attempting to make stillborn the Paul movement. Why? Because we are strong supporters of the original values of the Party? My friends, we are being weakened further by the poor leadership of that NeoCon faction and its adherents. Check the record.


The results since 2004 have been abysmal. In Colorado, while having a 200,000-vote advantage of registered Republicans over Democrats, we have lost the State Senate and the House, the Governor’s mansion, the Treasurer’s seat and two Congressional seats.


Nationally, we already have lost the US House and Senate and it is nearly a foregone conclusion we will lose 25-30 more House seats and 6-9 Senate seats in November.


In early tests, we have already lost seats in Illinois, Louisiana and Mississippi. Seats that Republicans have held for decades. The damage is mounting. We are CONTINUING to lose Governor’s seats left and right. The Democrats are out-raising us in funding $3 and $4 to one (in Congress $6 to $1) as noted recently by Republican Congressional leaders. The leadership should be forced to explain where it is that we have a winning strategy in constantly compromising our historic principles rather than firmly re-establishing them each generation? That is what the Founders taught.


From McKinley to Taft to Goldwater to Reagan, this Party used to promote and celebrate the core Republican message and historical principles of the Party. That seems to be all but banished from the party, except to pay it lip service. The result of that banishment are, and will be, clearly evident in the election results this November and after. If establishment Republicans persist in ostracizing and obstructing every attempt for the classic Republican message to have a voice in the Party, than who are Republicans, really? I did not spend the last 33 years as a conservative to start voting for liberals. Please join me today in supporting and promoting what should be the real message of the Republican Party in 2008 and beyond. Send the message to the Party leadership that we no longer support any further erosion of this party’s principles! Don’t allow them to keep rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. Regardless of whether or not you would ultimately have voted for Congressman Paul, every Republican should have respected the message. That was the Republican way for the first 140 years of this party. At this point, even if he wins, John McCain will likely be another Millard Fillmore presiding over the complete demise of the Whig Party from 1850-54.


 


Obama is NOTHING like Ron Paul....
nothing.