Extremely negative Washington Post Article attacking Ron Paul & Rick Perry

[tko13]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...gy-subsidies/2011/10/19/gIQA457kyL_story.html

 

[69360]

I wouldn't say extremely. Towards the bottom they explain Ron's position. He was against appropriating the money to begin with. He was simply doing his duty to his constituents as their representative to get already appropriated money for them.

Hey if they lump us in with Perry for some good old mainstream media smearing on actual issues, not suits and eyebrows, that is a good sign right?

 

[Philadelphia76]

I don't know... not great at the beginning of the article- but I don't find it really all that devastating. At least they provide an opportunity for the respective camps to lay out their rationale at the end- and both are defensible POV's IMHO (though Paul's is clearly more principled).

At the end of the day- Ron Paul's been a Congressmen for decades and doing things that Congressmen do (once spending has been approved that he opposed). What does the Washington Post think he's supposed to do? Throw a temper tantrum on the House floor? Go out and play golf or take a junket somewhere while his district gets robbed by the Feds with nothing coming back?

Anyway- I think he'll be fine on any line of attack that comes down this particular avenue. Upon even the most superficial investigation- his position is quite consistent with his long-stated beliefs.

 

[tko13]

The first half was a pretty heavy on the implied hypocrisy, and in today's ADD world that's about as much as most people will read. I feel that the article aims to associate RP with stereotypical political flip-flopping and pandering. I saw this being passed around on Facebook by some liberal friends calling RP a hypocrite and a friend of special interests. Clearly they took away the message the author intended.

If nothing else, everyone should be able to agree that RP has been consistent and has stuck to his principles over the years. It definitely irks me when I see the media try to spin it otherwise. I'm glad they did eventually represent RP's position in this article, but it definitely took a backseat to the negativity that was implied.

 

[kylejack]

I don't like the government picking winners and losers, so I can't endorse Paul's defense. He shouldn't be touching this stuff.

 

[cero]

hi tk, break the link if is a negative article