Great day in the morning. A congressman does something admirable and Optional/TrollZz doesn't like it.
please show an example of a bill that ron paul voted "nay" on that provided "pork" to his district. i am curious to see it.
i did some interesting research on this, thank you for pointing it out. as is the case most of the time, the author distorts the facts completely (as did you). in your link above, it states the following, verbatim: this, of course, makes it appear that ron paul is a big pork spender, because the "ranking" on the source's page (open secrets) is all earmarks, regardless of type. so those that agree to sign on to a bill only if they get their "Sweetheart" deal are lumped in with others who push for appropriating funds already allocated to serve some purpose - which is the case in the very first example listed in the "earmark" section on Paul (and incidentally, the largest "earmark" by far that Paul has ever "sponsored"). but a little research turns out to show that the $29.5 or so million earmark making up 37% of all paul's 23 earmarks (many of which are so minute that i'm not going to investigate on) was part of a much larger bill from the Energy and Water subcommittee that appropriated over $19 billion towards things like shoring up wetlands, construction to shore up low lying lands from ocean intrusion (remember, this was in response to katrina), etc. as a result, there were a lot of congressman and congresswomen who pushed for money from this project, which benefited texas, florida, louisiana, etc. coastal states. when you see ron paul as a sponsor, it is only a sponsor to a subsection of that bill that allocates some of the money for texas (remember, the money was already put aside for this purpose by the subcommittee which paul isn't even a member of). so essentially, the subcommittee said "we've set aside $19B for this project, we would like sponsors to speak up for sections of the spending regarding it". all paul did was take money that was already set aside for the purpose. he did not initiate the bill. interesting difference between the facts and what people would have you believe. have a nice read: http://www.legistorm.com/earmarks/b...er/page/1/sort/amount/type/desc/year/all.html http://appropriations.senate.gov/sc-energy.cfm