Rand Paul's below the belt ad hominem against Bill

[Paulie]

Just so jillian is clear though...

Ron Paul's earmark total for FY2010 is a whopping 14, for a grand total of a whopping $11 million.

He ranks 300 out of the 435 in the House.

 

[midcan5]

Acorn meet tree.

"Originally, when I began reporting on the Neo-Nazis and conspiracy theory driven right wing extremists and their associations with Ron Paul, I assumed they were a fringe group who jumped on to the Ron Paul bandwagon. Then after doing extensive research, I realized that not only did the Neo-Nazis and the John Birch/Timothy McVeigh based conspiracy theorists support Ron Paul, but Ron Paul supports the views of the Neo-Nazis and the conspiracy theorists.

There are several pieces of evidence tying Paul to both white supremacists and right wing conspiracy theorists. One connection that ties Paul to both Neo-Nazis and conspiracy theorists, is his close connection to the John Birch society. The John Birch Society is a group that has been called, paranoid, radical, racist, and extremist, and believes in a Jewish/Freemason conspiracy to transform the world into a communist “New World Order.”" Ron Paul Is A White Supremacist - Jack & Jill Politics


PS William Jefferson Clinton raised TAXES, and we had the best economy since Reagan started the destruction of the working class and the middle class.

 

[Paulie]

Oh, I strongly disagree that earmarks are necessary. The Senate should just allocate the money to the agency, but let the agency - the ones with the expertise in their area - allocate their budgeted monies on the programs THEY deem important to THEIR mission.

Well I should have been more clear. Not ALL of them are necessary.

Congresspeople have a district to represent, and if there is money that is needed in that district then there shouldn't be a problem with a portion of a budget being allocated to it.

Giving it to bureaucrats who sit in a DC office and have no clue what's really going on in a particular district is just asking for it to be misallocated.

That's exactly the reason NOT to have earmarks. Congresscritters use them for political payback rather than allowing the individual agencies to prioritize the programs based on how the programs fit into the agency's mission.

You've definitely got a point. Mistrust in congress certainly lends to negative feelings towards earmarks.

There's no perfect solution. If we give it all to the agencies, they'll be compromised and misallocate it as well. There's no way special interests are going to let that money slip through their hands.

 

[Paulie]

Oh, I strongly disagree that earmarks are necessary. The Senate should just allocate the money to the agency, but let the agency - the ones with the expertise in their area - allocate their budgeted monies on the programs THEY deem important to THEIR mission.

Well I should have been more clear. Not ALL of them are necessary.

Congresspeople have a district to represent, and if there is money that is needed in that district then there shouldn't be a problem with a portion of a budget being allocated to it.

Giving it to bureaucrats who sit in a DC office and have no clue what's really going on in a particular district is just asking for it to be misallocated.

That's exactly the reason NOT to have earmarks. Congresscritters use them for political payback rather than allowing the individual agencies to prioritize the programs based on how the programs fit into the agency's mission.

It's also a transparency issue. With earmarks, you know exactly where the money is going. Handing it to the bureaucracy reduces the amount of transparency in what every dollar is being spent on.

 

[Si modo]

Well I should have been more clear. Not ALL of them are necessary.

Congresspeople have a district to represent, and if there is money that is needed in that district then there shouldn't be a problem with a portion of a budget being allocated to it.

Giving it to bureaucrats who sit in a DC office and have no clue what's really going on in a particular district is just asking for it to be misallocated.

That's exactly the reason NOT to have earmarks. Congresscritters use them for political payback rather than allowing the individual agencies to prioritize the programs based on how the programs fit into the agency's mission.

You've definitely got a point. Mistrust in congress certainly lends to negative feelings towards earmarks.

There's no perfect solution. If we give it all to the agencies, they'll be compromised and misallocate it as well. There's no way special interests are going to let that money slip through their hands.

The funny thing is, after working for one of those agencies I came to dislike earmarks more than ever. WE had a mission, Congress gives us money and earmarks it for pet projects that do little to nothing to help our mission, and we know that money could be better spent elsewhere, and we are expected to meet our mission by that same Congress that tells us how to spend our money. Beyond being colossally inefficient, earmarks are often a complete waste of taxpayers' money.

 

[Si modo]

Well I should have been more clear. Not ALL of them are necessary.

Congresspeople have a district to represent, and if there is money that is needed in that district then there shouldn't be a problem with a portion of a budget being allocated to it.

Giving it to bureaucrats who sit in a DC office and have no clue what's really going on in a particular district is just asking for it to be misallocated.

That's exactly the reason NOT to have earmarks. Congresscritters use them for political payback rather than allowing the individual agencies to prioritize the programs based on how the programs fit into the agency's mission.

It's also a transparency issue. With earmarks, you know exactly where the money is going. Handing it to the bureaucracy reduces the amount of transparency in what every dollar is being spent on.

Without earmarks, the money is tracked by the agency and reported each year to the auditors. It's regulation. So, the transparency is already there. It's built in.

 

[Paulie]

That's exactly the reason NOT to have earmarks. Congresscritters use them for political payback rather than allowing the individual agencies to prioritize the programs based on how the programs fit into the agency's mission.

It's also a transparency issue. With earmarks, you know exactly where the money is going. Handing it to the bureaucracy reduces the amount of transparency in what every dollar is being spent on.

Without earmarks, the money is tracked by the agency and reported each year to the auditors. It's regulation. So, the transparency is already there. It's built in.

I disagree. Not only do I not trust the tracking, but handing the money to the administration to allocate is dangerous.

You're giving one political party, the one that sits in the white house, the power of the purse in that regard.

You really want Obama and his cabinet having carte blanche with appropriations?

 

[Paulie]

We still don't even know where every dollar of the non-earmarked TARP appropriation went.

Congress can always vote down an earmark. But once you give it all to the administration, there's no checks and balances anymore on the way it's spent.

 

[teapartysamurai]

poor insane tea loon

Which is Jillian's way of saying I owned her and she can't do anything back but spew pathetic little insults.

AW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Boo fweaking hoo!

you own the sofa, college was too challenging for ya

As Debate is too challenging for you.

 

[teapartysamurai]

Just so jillian is clear though...

Ron Paul's earmark total for FY2010 is a whopping 14, for a grand total of a whopping $11 million.

He ranks 300 out of the 435 in the House.

But the problem is, we are NOT talking about Ron Paul, we are talking about Rand Paul.

If the sins of the father count, then Al Gore Jr. must be a racist, because his Father sure was.

 

[California Girl]

poor insane tea loon

Which is Jillian's way of saying I owned her and she can't do anything back but spew pathetic little insults.

AW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Boo fweaking hoo!

I don't actually agree with Jillian but hell will freeze over before you 'own' her... because she's smarter than you. And she can post coherent sentences.

- Get it?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Here's a concept: If one dislikes being criticized for something, don't do it.

Exactly. Bill Clinton is a scumbag, so... what's the point?

 

[The Rabbi]

poor insane tea loon

Which is Jillian's way of saying I owned her and she can't do anything back but spew pathetic little insults.

AW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Boo fweaking hoo!

Jillian is a smelly troll of the first order with nothing rational to add to any discussion.

Amazing that the the Left has no problem standing up for a sexual predator like Clinton. You would think if anyone would earn the wrath of feminists it would be Clinton, who basically treated women like garbage.
Paul is perfectly right to bring up this horrible record, that got him impeached as proof of his poor character and unfitness for political life.

 

[WillowTree]

I think libturds should whine a little louder. We cannot hear them. Specially since none of them ever say a word about the low down dirty slimey shit eating attacks they launch. cryusariverwhydonchya?

 

[wyomingpatriot]

the gop really has no other than option than scrape every last inch of the shit barrel for candidates. ron paul is god, an admirable, true conservative. his son, on the other hand...well, then again, we all make mistakes when it comes to children, right?

 

[Si modo]

It's also a transparency issue. With earmarks, you know exactly where the money is going. Handing it to the bureaucracy reduces the amount of transparency in what every dollar is being spent on.

Without earmarks, the money is tracked by the agency and reported each year to the auditors. It's regulation. So, the transparency is already there. It's built in.

I disagree. Not only do I not trust the tracking, but handing the money to the administration to allocate is dangerous.

You're giving one political party, the one that sits in the white house, the power of the purse in that regard.

You really want Obama and his cabinet having carte blanche with appropriations?

Oh, Gawd, no!

I think we have our wires crossed.

Here's what I'm talking about, first generally, then using a hypothetical, yet commonplace example, for illustration. The President proposes a budget. Yeah, that's fine. Congress votes on that budget. That's more than fine, for the reason you mention in your post above - dangerous to have it otherwise.

What I, and many others around town, would like to see is that budget looks something like this:

$a billion to CIA
$b billion to DoD
$c billion to DLA
etc.
$d billion to NSF
$e billion to NIH
$f billion to CDC
etc.
and yada, yada, yada.

Instead, what we get out of Congress is something like this, just using one agency as an example: NIH gets $e billion. Of that, $x million is earmarked to go to MYFAVCONTRIBUTOR Biotech, Inc., Chicago, IL for research into development of cis-platin analogs for cancer chemotherapy.

Now, there is little that is wrong in developing such analogs, however, the NIH/NCI already knows that better use of that money would be research and drug development into drugs that bypass the drug resistance mechanism of tumor cells. Most of the folks at the NIH/NCI are experts on cancer and what is beneficial to the cancer patients in the short term and the long term. It's a great bet that congresscritters are extremely ignorant on that subject.

I hope that clarifies my point of view.

 

[teapartysamurai]

Acorn meet tree.

"Originally, when I began reporting on the Neo-Nazis and conspiracy theory driven right wing extremists and their associations with Ron Paul, I assumed they were a fringe group who jumped on to the Ron Paul bandwagon. Then after doing extensive research, I realized that not only did the Neo-Nazis and the John Birch/Timothy McVeigh based conspiracy theorists support Ron Paul, but Ron Paul supports the views of the Neo-Nazis and the conspiracy theorists.

There are several pieces of evidence tying Paul to both white supremacists and right wing conspiracy theorists. One connection that ties Paul to both Neo-Nazis and conspiracy theorists, is his close connection to the John Birch society. The John Birch Society is a group that has been called, paranoid, radical, racist, and extremist, and believes in a Jewish/Freemason conspiracy to transform the world into a communist “New World Order.”" Ron Paul Is A White Supremacist - Jack & Jill Politics


PS William Jefferson Clinton raised TAXES, and we had the best economy since Reagan started the destruction of the working class and the middle class.

Okay TWO PIECES OF STUPIDTY.

A) It's obvious I schooled liberals on trying to attack Rand Paul via, HOW DARE HE INSULT BILL CLINTON FOR BEING A SERIAL LIAR AND ADULTERER. JUST BECAUSE WE KNOW IT'S TRUE AND WE WOULDN'T LET A REPUBLICAN OFF THE HOOK LIKE THAT DOESN'T MEAN WE CAN'T DEMAND IT OF PAUL!!!!!

So, given that completely failed, all they have left is attack the father? Really? That's all you got! ATOMIC FAIL LIBERALS.

If it's "below the belt" to bring up Bill Clinton's past, it's NOT "below the belt to bring up Rand Paul's FATHER'S PAST?????????

ROFL WHAT A PACK OF HYPOCRITES!!!!

Thank you for proving me right once again, what a pack of utter hypocrites you are.

B) William Jefferson had the best economy?

You want to check unemployment figures for Bubba again?

Because that great economy you talk about, didn't happen until Republicans took Congress in 1994, and FORCED Clinton to cut capital gains and reform Welfare (and that's just two things they forced Clinton to do). How did they force him? Clinton didn't want to be embarrassed by an overrride vote, so he sign them, after he had vetoed them before.

Go ahead and look when unemployment numbers start to fall. It's AFTER 1994. Oh and that means your raise taxes meme doesn't count for much, because cutting capital gains, was a TAX CUT. Oops!

The United States Unemployment Rate By Year

 

[Si modo]

Plus, because of the freaking earmarks, the budget from Congress is so complicated that they rarely are able to pass the budget on time for the start of the fiscal year in October. Arguments over earmarks delay it and it's just plain long...very long. Because of that, a continuing resolution is required and even more time is spent on the budget. Almost every year this happens.

 

[Samson]

Rand Paul Lobs Lewinsky Attack At Bill Clinton

Bill Clinton talks about the economy and this shithead brings up Lewinsky. Despite Clinton's marriage indiscretions, he left the White House with a budget surplus and not with a trillion dollar deficit, but since the shithead wants to use ad hominems, why should any voter trust a politician who accepts and refuses to return donations from white supremacists?

Of course.

Rand Paul should have lobbed some "below-the-belt" accusation of witchcraft.

Then the Huffington Post would have understood it was OK.

"I'm not sure I would trust a guy who had had sexual relations with an intern," Paul said, responding to Clinton's campaign efforts for his Democratic rival Jack Conway earlier in the day, the Lexington Herald-Leader reports. "I mean, do you think he's an honorable person?"

 

[teapartysamurai]

Rand Paul Lobs Lewinsky Attack At Bill Clinton

Bill Clinton talks about the economy and this shithead brings up Lewinsky. Despite Clinton's marriage indiscretions, he left the White House with a budget surplus and not with a trillion dollar deficit, but since the shithead wants to use ad hominems, why should any voter trust a politician who accepts and refuses to return donations from white supremacists?

Of course.

Rand Paul should have lobbed some "below-the-belt" accusation of witchcraft.

Then the Huffington Post would have understood it was OK.

"I'm not sure I would trust a guy who had had sexual relations with an intern," Paul said, responding to Clinton's campaign efforts for his Democratic rival Jack Conway earlier in the day, the Lexington Herald-Leader reports. "I mean, do you think he's an honorable person?"

EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!!!

It's only okay when liberals do it!