inicio mail me! sindicaci;ón

T
H
A
T
S

M
Y

C
O
N
G
R
E
S
S

Ron Paul Is A Top Fossil Fool In the U.S. House

April 2, 2008 at 2:14 pm · Filed under All Articles, House campaigns

Goodness me, but after all the highfalutin’ talk about being independent and purging the American political system of its corruption, I would have expected better of Ron Paul. Silly me. I should have known better.

Texas Congressman Ron Paul is one of the top two Fossil Fools in the United States House of Representatives.

How did Ron Paul earn this distinction? It all comes down to Ron Paul’s dirty money. Of all the members of the U.S. House of Representatives, Ron Paul has taken an extremely high amount of money during the 2008 election cycle from big oil and gas corporations. He has taken $92,742 from big oil this election cycle.

You might be tempted to think that Ron Paul just got all this crude oil cash because he ran for President. You need to remember, however, that Ron Paul was not the only member of the U.S. House of Representatives to run for President this year. Dennis Kucinich did too, and so did Duncan Hunter. Duncan Hunter is a Republican, like Ron Paul, but he isn’t even in the top 20 recipients of big oil money

Duncan Hunter got only $1,800 for his presidential campaign from oil companies, and he’s not running for re-election to Congress. Wouldn’t you know it? Oil company executives didn’t bother giving money to Ron Paul’s presidential campaign either, because it was clear from the start that Ron Paul would not win the Republican nomination. The oil corporations have given to Ron Paul’s congressional re-election, because they knew he will likely win re-election there, and so that’s the race they can show influence over.

Why would big oil corporations want to help Ron Paul go back to Congress? That answer is an easy one. Ron Paul is a strong opponent of government regulations to restrict the air pollution that comes from burning petroleum products. Ron Paul doesn’t even believe in global warming, and thinks that there isn’t a single thing in his life that he does that damages the environment. In fact, Ron Paul wants to help big oil corporations completely evade government efforts at environmental protection, allowing them to do whatever they want, with no laws to stop them, and the vehicles that use their fossil fuel products, from fouling the environment.

Ron Paul is an oil corporation executive’s dream candidate. He’s the real deal - a genuine Fossil Fool.

Gravatar

Vincent said,

April 9, 2008 @ 9:10 am

Your extremely limited understanding of Dr. Paul’s views on global warming are quite nauseating. What has allowed the oil companies to gain the power they have is their collusion with our overgrown titanic government. In a truly free market system, companies would not be able to manipulate our representatives the way they do. Ron Paul endorses self control which we have not been allowed to exercise ourselves for many years due to the warfare/welfare state. Clearly you must see the big picture, I would rather not believe that you are this dumb….and rather just bought and paid for unlike the good Dr who has defended your rights for many years even though you have 0 respect for the ideals our founders tried to instill in future generations. Your a disgusting example of what our country has become. Everyone thinks that some agency should tell you how to be a good and responsible person and that Liberty is somehow tied to anarchy and abuse. The founders would have hung you for your words and rightfully so. If you want to clean the planet up, do this YOURSELF, throw out less trash, use less electric, stop spraying pesticides in your garden, stop dumping your used oil in the sewer, stop putting Drano in the sink, shut off your computers and stop writing(the best one)…..do you see? These are all things YOU can do that do not put global rules on me! Your a disgrace to your flag, your readers, your parents, and anyone else who has had the misfortune of reading your meaningless rants. I am now dumber having read your article. I think perhaps someone here is receiving payments, but it’s not Dr. Paul. It’s probably the guy in your mirror.

Gravatar

JeffH said,

April 9, 2008 @ 9:19 am

You don’t cite sources for your claims about Congressman Paul, nor do you back up your claim that he’s “..an oil corporation executive’s dream candidate” with any data from his congressional voting record to indicate that would be the case.

So, how about it? Cite your souce(s) with indepently verifiable links that speak to both the finance issue and to how Congressman Paul is friendly to big oil as you imply.

Gravatar

olafub said,

April 9, 2008 @ 10:00 am

That’s odd. Ron Paul does not vote for corporate welfare for oil companies. Unlike other policitans who subsidize exploration and drilling, ethanol, “clean coal” technologies, and costly oil wars in the middle east.

Had you done your homework you might have noted that Presidential candidate Rudolph W. Giuliani recieved $660,458 from oil and gas interests, Romney $455,863, McCain $404,136, Hillary $309,363, Obama $222,309, Richardson $206,125, F. Thompson $161,904
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/select.asp?Ind=E01

Gravatar

Dave said,

April 9, 2008 @ 11:43 am

I will say that in some cases it does appear that Dr. Paul supports big oil. However, with a little further examination I find that he’s not really supporting big oil as much as simply following the constitution. Just because an idea is popular doesn’t mean its constitutional for the federal government to get involved.

You guys should do your homework.
Big Oil didn’t invite him to a presidential summit (unlike Hillary Clinton)
http://www.houstonspresidentialsummit.com/meet-speakers/index.html

The current presidential contenders (not including Dr. Paul) have taken much more money:
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/03/big-oil-executives-spread-presidential-bets.php

Ron Paul’s agenda is quite antagonistic to big oil. He wants to remove their extensive subsidies, and probably would delegate much regulation to the states–decentralized political power is a real hassle for centralized corporations (where each state has different regulations).

Maybe Big Oil would benefit from some relaxation of Federal environmental law, as well as the elimination of the paltry mandates for alternative energy use…but I think they would clearly lose out on a Ron Paul Presidency…without even mentioning the effect of Ron Paul’s foreign policy.

When asked by Bill Maher if he thinks the Federal Government should be involved in stopping Global Warming, Ron Paul replied:

“Then you have to deal with the volcanoes, and you have to deal with China… so what are you going to do, invade China so they don’t pollute? … But that doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t do what we can to slow up the emissions and stop subsidizing big oil companies. I don’t like subsidizing oil companies. They’ve been doing that for years. We go to war to protect oil, so that we can buy more oil, and burn more oil. So I say our foreign policy contributes to global warming — by subsidizing a policy that is deeply flawed. And that’s why we’re in the Middle East, to protect oil interests.”

When asked if efforts to slow down Global Warming should be increased, Dr. Paul replied: “Yes.”

Because he does not support any piece of legislation not specifically authorized by the Constitution, Paul votes against most bills that involve government spending or expanded government initiatives; thus he does not seek legislation to combat the global warming. Instead, he advocates reducing emissions, halting subsidies to oil companies, and altering a war-for-oil foreign policy that in itself contributes to global warming.

So basically you’re complaining that he’s doing his job, which is following the constitution..

Gravatar

JeffH said,

April 9, 2008 @ 12:01 pm

Still nothing, huh? Here, I’ll help you out with the financing issue. While you’re reading the balance of the facts and digesting, might I ask if you intend to write about the other candidates who’ve recived more in ‘oil money’? I know you concentrate on Congress, but why not branch out a bit and include the Senators that are candidates too? For example, Senator McCain has taken in $404,136 in oil money. Or how about Senator Clinton with $309,363? Or perhaps Senator Obama with a measly $222,309?

We can get to Congressman Paul’s voting record later.

Gravatar

Dan said,

April 9, 2008 @ 12:33 pm

Oh please, if he did receive money then it was from people who work for oil companies… or else they also happen to like the message of freedom and liberty. There’s nothing wrong with that, and the more people who buy into it the better! Also, just because they donate to his cause doesn’t mean he’s going to give them anything in return (special favors). He’s been consistent and principled his whole life/career with no strings attached, so I seriously doubt he’s about the break that tradition.

Gravatar

Dan said,

April 9, 2008 @ 12:47 pm

Sir, the only fool here is YOU for accepting the bullshit Global Warming agenda that is being pushed heavily by the power elite as another means to further strip the middle class of their wealth. There is climate change, and there HAS been climate change, since the inception of the Earth. I highly suggest you read the following article, and educate yourself a bit:

http://www.lindafrum.com/NewsDetail.aspx?newsid=74

RP supports the Constitution, and as such, supports free market capitalism. This encourages competition, and will break up the tax subsidies and breaks that our government gives big oil and other giant corporations, and will encourage others to direct resources into finding alternative fuel sources of energy. If you want to bring about change, you need to lay the necessarily economical groundwork for it to take foot.

By the way, watch out for that WHOPPING $91K that RP received for his campaign…oh boy now. I highly suggest you take a look at the millions funneled into Democratic and Repub. candidates from big oil, particularly Bush.

Gravatar

BT said,

April 9, 2008 @ 12:58 pm

I am glad that Dr. Paul does not fall for the Liberal lies about global warming. The people that do spread this dis information could not hold water in a court of law based on fact, and anyone that speaks out about an individual not falling for the thoery of global warming simply shows their ignorance. ( http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=88520025 )
We as a people have relied on science for medical, industrial, and self preservation to name a few, but when scientific evidence does not fall in line with political motivated ideals, then the mud slinging starts to sell an idea to the people. If Dr. Paul in fact took monies from the oil companies then good for him as he would certainly use the money to spread the message of Liberty, but I have not seen a link to prove this either. Not to judge the authors credability, are we the readers to just take what is in this article to heart with no proof? I assume that since global warming was mentioned, my above question was answered before I asked.

BT

RSS feed for comments on this post · TrackBack URI

Leave a Comment