Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 25

Thread: Senator-Elect Rand Paul Now OK with Earmarks

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Last Seen
    07-25-11 @ 05:42 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    464

    Senator-Elect Rand Paul Now OK with Earmarks

    Via Daily Kos and Think Progress comes the news that Senator-Elect Rand Paul, who had run on a platform of banning earmarks, will seek to obtain them for Kentucky. A quote from the Wall Street Journal, introduced in the Think Progress article:

    In a bigger shift from his campaign pledge to end earmarks, he tells me that they are a bad "symbol" of easy spending but that he will fight for Kentucky's share of earmarks and federal pork, as long as it's doled out transparently at the committee level and not parachuted in in the dead of night. "I will advocate for Kentucky's interests," he says.

  2. #2
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,940

    Re: Senator-Elect Rand Paul Now OK with Earmarks

    Quote Originally Posted by Troubadour View Post
    Via Daily Kos and Think Progress comes the news that Senator-Elect Rand Paul, who had run on a platform of banning earmarks, will seek to obtain them for Kentucky. A quote from the Wall Street Journal, introduced in the Think Progress article:
    And as I've said, time and time again, there's nothing wrong with this.

    You fight to ban earmarks because that makes less money the government needs which means less money being spent and more going to the debt. That's beneficial to the people of Kentucky which he's supposed to be working for.

    HOWEVER

    If your fight fails, and that money is designated to go to the states in one way or another, then its your job to get as much of that again for your constituents you work for.

    To give an analogy.

    You are a father of a son on a baseball team where all the parents of the boys have put in money at the start of the year to pay for supplies, equipment, activities, etc. After a big a bunch of the dads want to take the kids out to Chuck-E-Cheese to have pizza and get $50 worth of tokens for all the kids to use. You suggest that the kids just enjoyed their baseball game, there was no reason to go to such an expensive place, how about you go to the local pizza place down the street and save that money for later in the year come banquet time.

    However, despite your advocacy of restraint, the parents over vote you and off to Chuck-E-Cheese you go. Now the pizza is going to be bought, regardless if your son eats or not. The $50 in tokens is going to be bought, regardless if your son eats or not. While previously, when things weren't certain, it was in your sons best interest to fight for restraint with the money...NOW that the money is going to be spent regardless its in your sons best interest to eat and play with it as well.

    If Rand Paul forgoes earmarks when the budget is allowing for them he's not doing anything good in regards to his principles. He's not saving money, he's not reducing the deficit, because that money's simply going to anotehr state. All he's doing is causing undue limitations on his state.

    There's absolutely nothing wrong with what he's doing. You try to change the system, but until you change it you work to the best of your ability within a system.

  3. #3
    Count Smackula
    rathi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    10-31-15 @ 10:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    7,890

    Re: Senator-Elect Rand Paul Now OK with Earmarks

    Earmarks are about $20 billion a year, which is a drop in the bucket compared to the deficit. I don't like the "bad behavior is okay if its for my state mentality", but that more than balanced out by Paul's willingness to go after the real parts of the budget, including defense spending.
    :

  4. #4
    Sage
    Barbbtx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    W'Ford TX
    Last Seen
    11-10-12 @ 08:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,467

    Re: Senator-Elect Rand Paul Now OK with Earmarks

    I heard his statements were "walked back" or taken out of conext.
    Anyway, what I heard somewhere was that he would go through appropriations for money for his state. They wouldn't be earmarks stuck into bills.
    Since, in my opinion, bribery for votes, is the problem, and not the money going to states for approved projects, I like this idea. I hope it's true.
    Catawa is my favorite bleeding heart liberal.
    1/27/12

  5. #5
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:52 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,706

    Re: Senator-Elect Rand Paul Now OK with Earmarks

    Senator elect Paul is positioning himself in a rather clever position. He will join with a few others in Quixotic attacks upon bills and procedures so that he can tell the True Believers that he is carrying out his mandate and being true to his principles while knowing the whole time that the bill or procedure will pass. His comments yesterday on the debt ceiling are a perfect illustration.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  6. #6
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,018

    Re: Senator-Elect Rand Paul Now OK with Earmarks

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    And as I've said, time and time again, there's nothing wrong with this.

    You fight to ban earmarks because that makes less money the government needs which means less money being spent and more going to the debt. That's beneficial to the people of Kentucky which he's supposed to be working for.

    HOWEVER

    If your fight fails, and that money is designated to go to the states in one way or another, then its your job to get as much of that again for your constituents you work for.

    To give an analogy.

    You are a father of a son on a baseball team where all the parents of the boys have put in money at the start of the year to pay for supplies, equipment, activities, etc. After a big a bunch of the dads want to take the kids out to Chuck-E-Cheese to have pizza and get $50 worth of tokens for all the kids to use. You suggest that the kids just enjoyed their baseball game, there was no reason to go to such an expensive place, how about you go to the local pizza place down the street and save that money for later in the year come banquet time.

    However, despite your advocacy of restraint, the parents over vote you and off to Chuck-E-Cheese you go. Now the pizza is going to be bought, regardless if your son eats or not. The $50 in tokens is going to be bought, regardless if your son eats or not. While previously, when things weren't certain, it was in your sons best interest to fight for restraint with the money...NOW that the money is going to be spent regardless its in your sons best interest to eat and play with it as well.

    If Rand Paul forgoes earmarks when the budget is allowing for them he's not doing anything good in regards to his principles. He's not saving money, he's not reducing the deficit, because that money's simply going to anotehr state. All he's doing is causing undue limitations on his state.

    There's absolutely nothing wrong with what he's doing. You try to change the system, but until you change it you work to the best of your ability within a system.
    A more coherent analogy would be a reverend who screams about making homosexuality illegal because it is a sin. However because nobody is paying attention to his crazy ass, the reverend decides he too should engage in some dick sucking of his own. I mean after all, it's okay to not follow what you're preaching if nobody else is listening. Make the system work for you. Who cares if you're being nothing more than a hypocrite as long as you get to point fingers yourself? Right?

    Your diatribes are almost as dishonest as Paul himself.
    Last edited by Hatuey; 11-09-10 at 02:32 PM.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

  7. #7
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:52 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,706

    Re: Senator-Elect Rand Paul Now OK with Earmarks

    from Zyphlin

    There's absolutely nothing wrong with what he's doing. You try to change the system, but until you change it you work to the best of your ability within a system.
    I suspect we will hear this time and time again over the next two years when the Rand Pauls of this Congress have to explain why they cannot deliver on their ideological extremist agenda. We will hear it so often that it will become a mantra. And two years from now it will all be the fault of Barack Obama and the Democrats despite the Republicans gaining such wide control in the House. It will be very hard for them to actually step up to the plate and be accountable for an actual program and actual results. Its much easier to say NO and I suspect they only want to continue saying NO for the next two years.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  8. #8
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,940

    Re: Senator-Elect Rand Paul Now OK with Earmarks

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    A more coherent analogy would be a reverend who screams about making homosexuality illegal because it is a sin. However because nobody is paying attention to his crazy ass, the reverend decides he too should engage in some dick sucking of his own. I mean after all, it's okay to not follow what you're preaching if nobody else is listening. Make the system work for you. Who cares if you're being nothing more than a hypocrite as long as you get to point fingers yourself? Right?

    Your diatribes are almost as dishonest as Paul himself.
    You're joking right. I do an analogy that is a scaled down example of what's going on and you complain that its not coherent and proceed to ramble on about a priest and dick sucking and morals and ethics and sins? And you're bitching about MY analogy?

    You have someone whose job is to look out for the best interest of the people that's put their trust in him. That person thinks it'll be best for those that hold his trust if money is saved rather than used. However, once that money is set to be used no matter what, it is now in the best interest of his people to get as much of it as possible for them.

    This applies to both the actual situation...of Paul pushing against earmark spending, and then once the spending is part of the budget attempting to get that spending...and for the analogy...where the dad is pushing against wasteful celebratory spending, and then once the coins and food are bought attempting to get his kid to partake. In both instances the individual is doing what is best financially for the people whose trust is given to him based on the reality of the situation.

    In your worthless and incoherent analogy, you have someone proclaiming something should be illegal and engaging in it because its not illegal. There is no care there for the interest of those that put their trust in him...IE, you can not say to me that he's getting his dick sucked because he thinks its best for his congregation. There is no reaction to the changing realities...the situation regarding the legality of gay marriage and the ability for him to get his dick sucked has not magically changed between the time he preaches against it and the time that he is having it done to him.

    Before you start throwing stones about incoherence and diatribe you should a) look up the damn word and b) not make your own post a candidate to be placed in Webster's next to the definitions of the words.


    A senators job is to do what he believes will be best for his constituents. Paul believes that removing earmarks and the spending that goes along with it will help the country out fundamnetally, and as such will be of great benefit to his constitutents. However, once reality changes and money is appropriated and no matter how much Paul protests its going to get spent, then it is in the best interest of his constitutents to get the most of that money as is needed. In both situations he is doing his job as a senator, attempting to do what's best for his voters, based on the reality of the situation at hand.

    But I'm sorry, I know dealing with reality won't let you get your worthless and meaningly strawman shots at religion and "gay preachers", but if you want to discuss the topic you might actually want to address...I don't know...the topic.

  9. #9
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,618

    Re: Senator-Elect Rand Paul Now OK with Earmarks

    What he stated is that he will fight for Kentucky's interests. Heres a plain and simple truth. the PEOPLE of Kentucky will be taxed by the federal government. Certain portions of those federal taxes are routinely returned to the states. What Rand Paul said is simply that he will fight to ensure Kentucky recieves what it should.

    Now...want to make it more simple? Gut the federal government, reduce the citizens federal tax burdens, and make the states responsible for their own pork and programs. Until you do that a state representative would be cutting their constituents throats by allowing them to be taxed and not see the state receive a fair allocation return. He didnt say he was gonna get his state some pork...he didnt say he was going to bo build them a bridge to nowhere...he said he was simply going to fight for Kentucky's interests. Presumably you can assume that means education and highway funding.

    Now...IF he actually gets into congress and DOES introduce a bunch of pork legislation than by all means you would be right to be critical of him and I would join in that critique. Until he does...well...it wont matter...at least...not to myopic ideologues...

  10. #10
    cookies crumble
    ARealConservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    04-21-17 @ 09:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    14,518

    Re: Senator-Elect Rand Paul Now OK with Earmarks

    And so it begins.

    The left has a new enemy. This enemy was against the Iraq war, the patriot act, and many other things they pretended to care about once upon a time.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •