Fox News Uncovers Ron Paul's Most Shocking Skeleton in the Closet

taking into account ron paul's response to this...the establishment is obviously going to have a hard time going after this guy while trying to sell their new world order globalist candidates...

Fox News Uncovers Ron Paul's Most Shocking Skeleton in the Closet
Desperate debunkers resort to attacking Congressman on amount of money he requests for shrimp research, while Giuliani's rampant corruption is ignored Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Tuesday, August 7, 2007

[align=left]Fox News are so desperate to dig up any dirt on Ron Paul, that one of their flagship shows last night resorted to attacking him over the amount of federal funding he requested for shrimp research.
Watch the video.[/align]

[align=left] Texas congressman and Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul â?? who is campaigning as a critic of congressional overspending â?? has revealed that he is requesting $400 million worth of earmarks this year," reported the Brit Hume show.
The Wall Street Journal reports Paul's office says those requests include $8 million for the marketing of wild American shrimp and $2.3 million to pay for research into shrimp fishing.
[/align]
A spokesman says, "Reducing earmarks does not reduce government spending, and it does not prohibit spending upon those things that are earmarked. What people who push earmark reform are doing is they are particularly misleading the public â?? and I have to presume it's not by accident."

[align=left]The Texas Lone Star Times also ran with the shrimp hit piece, which originated with an article in the Wall Street Journal. [/align]
[align=left](Article continues below)[/align]

[align=left] If Ron Paul's biggest skeleton in the closet is the amount of money his district spends on shrimp research, then the establishment media are going to have a difficult time maintaining their assault on his credibility as they panic in fear at the Congressman's runaway popularity.[/align]
[align=left]
The Congressman himself explained why earmarks have no relation to cutting the federal budget in a June 2007 article.[/align]

[align=left] Though much attention is focused on the notorious abuses of earmarking, and there are plenty of examples, in fact even if all earmarks were eliminated we would not necessarily save a single penny in the federal budget. Because earmarks are funded from spending levels that have been determined before a single earmark is agreed to, with or without earmarks the spending levels remain the same. Eliminating earmarks designated by Members of Congress would simply transfer the funding decision process to federal bureaucrats rather then elected representatives. In an already flawed system, earmarks can at least allow residents of Congressional districts to have a greater role in allocating federal funds â?? their tax dollars â?? than if the money is allocated behind locked doors by bureaucrats. So we can be critical of the abuses in the current system but we shouldn't lose sight of how some reforms may not actually make the system much better.
[/align]

[align=left]Their desperation in scraping the barrel to uncover any dirt on Paul previously yielded the equally shocking scandal of one his aides having written fifteen years ago about crime figures and black people - another feeble jab that fizzled into nothing.

Compare the egregious and rampant corruption of Rudy Giuliani with Ron Paul's alleged shrimp overspend and ask yourself why Fox News isn't running hit pieces on the Nosferatu of the Republican presidential race.
As we reported yesterday, Fox News attempted to smear Paul by debunking the 9/11 truth movement and then associating it with the Texas Congressman. [/align]

"Reducing earmarks does not reduce government spending, and it does not prohibit spending upon those things that are earmarked."

LMAO! Typical politician!! Even though I'm spending doesn't mean that I'm spending..........kind of like people trying to justify spending $50 they don't have just because they had a 25% off coupon. "Hey, look at the money I saved!"

Have a REAL one!:s4:

He is by far THE BEST major candidate there is. I agree with a lot of his stances.

Who were you planning on voting for......Rudy?? hahaha!

I saw that article but I have one problem. WTF is an earmark?

i think the most harmful thing to ron pauls campaign is the fact he is a republican, if he was a democrat im almost sure he would win without a doubt

This will hurt Ron.His platform is for smaller government and spending.I don't think this fits into that profile.Just another lieing cheating politician

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by onequestion

I saw that article but I have one problem. WTF is an earmark?

---

Pet projects that they want passed for the benifit of their state...such as having "research" done or a certain Gov. facility built up.

You know....a couple hundred million spent here and there that they really don't want the "general voter" to know about. Or in Ron Pauls case.....God Bless Texas!

What is an Earmark?

Earmarks are funds provided by the Congress for projects or programs where the congressional direction (in bill or report language) circumvents the merit-based or competitive allocation process, or specifies the location or recipient, or otherwise curtails the ability of the Executive Branch to properly manage funds. Congress includes earmarks in appropriation bills - the annual spending bills that Congress enacts to allocate discretionary spending - and also in authorization bills.
Earmarks

Have a good one!:s4:

Yeah i don't really like Ron for doing this but he is still a step above other politicians on this issue. He still votes against his own earmarks. That is a step better than other politicans who request AND vote for their earmarks.