PDA

View Full Version : Wall Street Journal writer responds to the Rand Paul Earmark flap w/ full transcript




sailingaway
11-09-2010, 03:04 PM
of that portion of the interview:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704635704575604680661943738.html?m od=googlenews_wsj

It is completely consistent with what he said on the campaign trail.

bobbyw24
11-09-2010, 03:06 PM
WSJ Reporter says:

I stand by the story as written, but in the interest of full disclosure we are posting the full transcript of the relevant section of the interview below. Readers can draw their own conclusions

sailingaway
11-09-2010, 03:07 PM
WSJ Reporter says:

I stand by the story as written, but in the interest of full disclosure we are posting the full transcript of the relevant section of the interview below. Readers can draw their own conclusions

My conclusion is that the author is a tool.

DeadheadForPaul
11-09-2010, 03:10 PM
LOL I don't see how Rand has changed his position at all

Either he misunderstood or is deliberately trying to harm Rand's image

RonPaulCult
11-09-2010, 03:15 PM
How can they stand by their story!?!?!?!?!?!?/

TheHumblePhysicist
11-09-2010, 03:42 PM
My honest interpretation of the article?

I think that this was a failure to communicate on the part of Rand. If you read it, he seems to stumble over his own dialogue a little bit, it is not very clear what exactly he is saying. Click on the comments tab and you will see people puzzling over what he was trying to say.

TheDriver
11-09-2010, 03:42 PM
My conclusion is that the author is a tool.

+1

And he doesn't understand the earmark process.

TheDriver
11-09-2010, 03:45 PM
My honest interpretation of the article?

I think that this was a failure to communicate on the part of Rand. If you read it, he seems to stumble over his own dialogue a little bit, it is not very clear what exactly he is saying. Click on the comments tab and you will see people puzzling over what he was trying to say.

If you take the first two sentences of both questions, there is no way you could draw any conclusion that Rand Paul is for earmarks (now or ever).....


Question: What if someone comes to you and says here's an earmark, mind turning a blind eye to this?

Mr. Paul: The earmarks are a really small percentage of the budget but I think they symbolize a lot of the waste and I think we shouldn't do it.

Q: So if Roy Blunt calls you up, tells you, 'hey, I want to get this bridge built in southern Missouri'?

Mr. Paul: I think we can do it if I'm on the transportation committee, we discuss it and we find out his bridge is more important than the bridge in Louisville, or more important than the bridge in northern Kentucky. I think that's the way legislating should occur. You work it out, you find out, and then you should say how much money do you have?

This writer is an idiot or a professional hit-man.

low preference guy
11-09-2010, 03:51 PM
My honest interpretation of the article?

I think that this was a failure to communicate on the part of Rand. If you read it, he seems to stumble over his own dialogue a little bit, it is not very clear what exactly he is saying. Click on the comments tab and you will see people puzzling over what he was trying to say.

bullshit. he said the same things during the campaign, so it's not a change of his position. the wsj writer is really making stuff up. rand can't be responsible for that.

TheDriver
11-09-2010, 03:53 PM
The writer is getting hammered in the comments... LMAO



Wow, Matt... sounds like you tried to go after Paul and both the Senator and your bosses quickly reacted.

Frankly, after reading the transcript, the only reason I can imagine for management not suspending you without pay for a month is that they didn't want to cause a media feeding frenzy.

I sincerely hope you've learned your lesson.

Sola_Fide
11-09-2010, 04:14 PM
This is all total bunk.


Rand has always said that he would not oppose funding for projects in Kentucky that came out of a balanced budget.


But I tell you what. The attacks won't stop. The state-corporate masters know that Rand is enemy #1.

K Elaine
11-09-2010, 05:12 PM
For some people are asking right now, is there still room for the old fun and games??

The journalist himself seems to suggest: so, what's a person to do when one man calls another man for some money ... and he just sounds so 'reasonable,' talking to each other as friends with the best intentions and having earned the respect of his colleagues after many years of admirable service to his constituents (who are in fact the best workers in the world), and these pillars of the community who have done their duty to fill out the necessary paperwork that assures the highest ethics are observed in requesting a moderate amount of assistance, which could lead to incredible breakthroughs for an entire district, the community, the state, the world! - That must be OK... Right? Right?

:D

Bern
11-09-2010, 05:18 PM
man of the world, eh? know what I mean? know what I mean?