Rick Perry Picks Up the Attacks on Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul for Earmarks
Email
Spencer Platt/Getty Images
SPENCER, Iowa – With his eyes on a spot in the top three in Iowa come January, Rick Perry made it evident Saturday that he’s looking to knock Newt Gingrich and Rep. Ron Paul from their perches atop the Iowa polls.
The Texas governor opened a new line of attack on the two, linking Gingrich and Paul for their support of earmark spending in Congress.
“Earmarks is a, it’s a plague. It’s a plague on Congress,” Perry said speaking at La Chiesa restaurant in Iowa. “Newt was the originator of earmarks back in the 90′s. I mean, if there was a granddaddy of earmarks, he would be it, and I mean, Dr. Paul, he’s still birthing earmarks as we speak.”
Perry has sparingly criticized Paul, a fellow Texan politician, but the Texas governor picked up the attacks this week, first condemning his comments on Iran at a coffee shop Friday and then laying into his penchant for earmarks at Saturday’s event in Spencer.
“The Republicans stood up and said, “you know what, we’re going to do away with earmarks,’ but there were four Republicans that didn’t follow that, and Dr. Paul was one of them,” Perry continued. “He had earmarks I think over the last two years approaching half a billion worth of these special interest earmarks. One of them was for two million dollars for bike racks, trash cans, and decorative street lighting in one of his cities in his district. Now, I’ll be real honest with you. I don’t think that’s where our monies need to be spent when we’ve got the economic crisis that we’ve got in our hands, and we’ve got to have the people who have the discipline to just say no to spending until we get this debt crisis in this country under control.”
“For some people, earmarks have become an art form and Newt doubled them in the four years when he was in congress. He solicited them for members of the legislature who had tough reelections,” Perry said. “I think Americans are tired of that kind of special interest spending.”
Asked by a voter if he’d appoint Herman Cain as Secretary of Defense, Perry said it’s “a little bit early” to begin making decisions about his cabinet but remarked that Cain possesses the outsider characteristics he’d want his appointees to embody.
“That’s the type of men and women that I’ll be asking to come to sacrifice one more time for their country to get this country back on track and to make the hard decision and make the wise decision about all the self dealing and get rid of the fraud and corruption that we’re seeing in Washington, D.C.”
Perry noted that gender would not play a factor in his selection of a vice presidential candidate when asked by a voter if he would select a female running mate.
“What comes into question is your values, what do you believe in. It will be someone that if the good Lord decides to call me home while I’m president of the United States, you won’t notice any difference in the philosophy or the way that Washington needs to be less consequential in your life. You might just have a little different accent.”
Perry popped into Sisters Mainstreet Cafe early Saturday morning, talking with voters about growing up in Paint Creek, Texas and sharing concerns about wild boars infiltrating urban areas.
While at the coffee shop, he was asked by John Kruse, a retired mail carrier from Spencer, to autograph a piece of paper, but when Perry went to scribble his name on a receipt, Michele Bachmann, who is campaigning in two of the same towns as Perry, had already signed her name to it.
“You get Michele on that side. I’ll get over here,” Perry said while he turned the receipt over and signed “Rick Perry God Speed.” “We spent the night at the same… We had both the buses out the front, so we see each other out on the trail there. She’s a good gal.”
In fact, Perry and Bachmann both spent the night at the AmericInn in Spencer. Perry’s bus was parked in the parking lot while Bachmann’s bus sat in the field next door.
“It was a real privilege shaking those representing our party,” Kruse said. Though he remains undecided, Kruse appreciated Perry’s “forthrightness” and the Iowan values embodied by Bachmann.
Best Commencement Speeches of 2012 
Joe Biden Recalls Death of Wife, Daughter
Ron Paul never votes for the bill the earmarks are in, never sells his vote for that, clearly. IF his constituents will be made to pay their share for a bill he is going to vote against, he makes sure they get as much back in benefit as he can get them, but his earmarks don’t add a penny to the bill, they divide a lump sum otherwise going to the executive as a lump sum. And then Ron Paul votes AGAINST every one of the bills. Others in Congress can’t say the same, which is why, for them, it is an issue. Not for Ron Paul.
Posted by: LK | December 17, 2011, 2:58 pm 2:58 pm
The Earmarks are a non-issue. That money is going to be spent anyways by the executive when it goes into the “slush” fund; Ron Paul is just trying to get money back for his district that were taxed against his will. Ron Paul would prefer no income tax, but if that money is going to be taxed and spent anyway; might as well get some back. Kinda like a tax refund. :)
Posted by: Greg | December 17, 2011, 3:05 pm 3:05 pm
BTW… Ron Paul votes against the spending bills. He just wants to make sure that in case it passes his people will get their fair share.
Posted by: Greg | December 17, 2011, 3:10 pm 3:10 pm
Ron Paul has never once voted for a budget that contained ear marks. No one else can say that…no one.
Posted by: Dangler | December 17, 2011, 3:14 pm 3:14 pm
Why does Perry hate Texans so much? Does he not want his residents to get some of their hard earned money back? That earmarked money is used to help Texas rather than become wasted building things people in Texas could care less, such as the infamous bridge to no where in Alaska.
Earmarks add nothing to the budget.
Posted by: dp | December 17, 2011, 3:28 pm 3:28 pm
Rick Perry has never written an earmark. In fact, I’m not sure he’s ever written anything at all.
Posted by: libconlib | December 17, 2011, 3:36 pm 3:36 pm
The earmark rhetoric is a non-issue. The benefit of spending trillions of dollars to send our troops around the world to fight in endless undeclared wars is an issue worth debating.
Ron Paul 2012
Posted by: soot | December 17, 2011, 3:38 pm 3:38 pm
Here is my view on earmarks! Yes they can and are often very wasteful, HOWEVER!
Earmarks over the past couple of years have only made up 0.4 to 0.6% of all federal expenditures!
Conclusion, the fuss over earmarks is a distraction from the real issues!
Posted by: Silence Dogood | December 17, 2011, 3:42 pm 3:42 pm
Ron Paul is also the only candidate that wants to do away with the “plague” of earmarks. He doesn’t agree with how the system work and has said many times the states should not have to ask for their money back with strings attached.
Thank you Perry for spreading the work on Earmarks. Now VOTE RON PAUL to change it. Or Perry, who just like the others, will keep the system he hypocritically is using against other Paul.
Posted by: William | December 17, 2011, 3:43 pm 3:43 pm
The issue of earmarks is poorly understood. They are oftentimes associated with wasteful projects. But the term “earmark” means to set specifically aside. If that is understood, ALL spending should be earmarked.
Earmarks can be wasteful, but they don’t increase govt. spending. That is because the appropriation bill sets the amoung to be spent for so-called discretionary spending. If a congressman doesn’t specifically request money for highways, bridges, etc., then a bureaucracy in the executive branch will do it.
If Paul had his way, the money for things like this would have never left Texas to begin with. But once the money is confiscated, Dr. Paul feels that it is imperative to bring as much of it back to Texas residents as possible.
I know that Paul is gaining a lot of traction because the GOP establishment (Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin, et al) are going after him hard at the moment. They are showing their true colors. They aren’t free market men or constitutionalists. They are statists.
Posted by: joe peeler | December 17, 2011, 3:48 pm 3:48 pm
Rick Perry is a moron, so it only stands to reason that he would not understand the logic behind Dr. Paul’s views on earmarks, or foreign policy. This clown (Perry) is desperate for attention, and apparently needs to be schooled again by Dr. Paul to set him straight. Ron Paul put not only Perry but every other candidate on the debate stage on December 15th in their place. Apparently, Perry just didn’t get the message!
Posted by: Bob Vondruska | December 17, 2011, 3:48 pm 3:48 pm
December 30th Ron Paul STATUS BOMB– Update your Facebook/Twitter/etc status with “Ron Paul 2012″ and help spread the word before the new year and voting begins!
Posted by: YHW2 | December 17, 2011, 3:51 pm 3:51 pm
Many people think of earmarks in the wrong way. Ron Paul sort of uses it as an insurance policy; in case a spending bill passes against his wishes, earmarks will give his people at least some of their money back. Taxes are like fire and if they burn down your house (or district); you have insurance (earmarks).
Posted by: Name (required) | December 17, 2011, 3:58 pm 3:58 pm
Rick Perry is ridiculous. Ron Paul has never once voted an ear mark, EVER. He just bites his tongue and goes along with it because that money is gonna be spend anyways, better fix some beat up stuff in Texas then it go to fixing some beat up stuff in Afghanistan and Iraq and Israel, etc, etc, etc.
Posted by: Andrew | December 17, 2011, 4:00 pm 4:00 pm
I doubt that Governor Perry really knows an earmark when he sees one. Social Security is an earmark. The Governor’s party (both of them) did away with that earmark years ago wanting to spend the money on things more important to them.
Posted by: Roy Western | December 17, 2011, 4:21 pm 4:21 pm
Ricky getting desperate now…
Posted by: Anon | December 17, 2011, 4:22 pm 4:22 pm
You Paul supporters are all over the board here. Just read the comments:
‘He puts in earmarks, but doesn’t vote on the bill he puts them in.’
Or, ‘Ron Paul doesn’t put in earmarks, period.’
Or, ‘Earmarks are no big deal anyway.’
Or, ‘He votes against ALL spending bills, but he puts his in anyway, so if one passes then his people get theirs.’
Or, ‘They’re just a tiny fraction of the budget, so it’s a non-issue.’
Yet when y’all discuss this subject, substituting ANY Democrat for ‘Ron Paul’, you crucify him or her for “pork barrel spending”. You really need to get yourselves together here……………
Posted by: Searambler | December 17, 2011, 4:27 pm 4:27 pm
Except for the fact that Ron Paul has never voted for an earmark!
He votes against all the appropriations bills.
Posted by: Jack | December 17, 2011, 4:28 pm 4:28 pm
Perry took his 8k a month pension as governor of Texas, While he is still collecting a 200k salary???? Ron Paul refuses to accept a government pension. Do the math.
Posted by: johneverymann | December 17, 2011, 4:34 pm 4:34 pm
Um, the best part about this attack is that the earmarks were in bills that ron paul knew would pass regardless of whether the earmarks were there. He often times would load a bill with earmarks and then explicitly vote “no” on the bill.. Ron Paul is a genius, and as I have personally heard him explain, the federal government is going to spend regardless, so why not try to get that money back into the hands of the people in your district?
Posted by: nuzlum | December 17, 2011, 4:41 pm 4:41 pm
Ron Paul VOTES against all earmarks every time. Go look it up. The only reason he goes along with it is because if he didn’t texas money would be lost on other useless projects. His responsibility is to his constitutuency. He want them to get back what they payed in . Nothing LESS and nothing MORE.unlike that useless Alaskan bridge to nowhere!! RON PAUL 2012!!
Posted by: Jay | December 17, 2011, 4:49 pm 4:49 pm
I love that this is the closest thing to “dirt” that they can dig up on Ron Paul. The whole idea of earmarks being demonized is ridiculous. Ideally, congress should not be taking any money from the citizens without some specific purpose. I.E. “we need X number of dollars to build this new interstate highway, we’re going to raise it through implementing tolls on these roads”. That (designating where money is to be spent) is what an earmark is, and it is the DUTY of congress to designate money in this way. Yes it is possible for unscrupulous congressmen to use earmarks for corrupt purposes, but no more so than it is for the executive branch to use money that has not been earmarked in this way, such as with things like bank bailouts, Solyndra, Haliburton, etc. (To use examples from both sides). Ron Paul does NOT vote for the spending bill, nor does he add to the expenditure. He tries to ensure that if a wasteful spending bill is going to pass without him, he and his constituents have some say in how the money is spent, rather than simply donating generously to the federal slush fund. To sum it up, this is NOT an issue, at least not one with Ron Paul.
Posted by: David | December 17, 2011, 5:09 pm 5:09 pm
Perry said: “we’ve got to have the people who have the discipline to just say no to spending until we get this debt crisis in this country under control.”
Does he know that going to war isn’t free? What about the rest of the neocons who constantly rail against spending and then make it clear they wouldn’t hesitate to go to war, which costs trillions from start to finish? Perry is just trying to figure out a way to become relevant again, but its really too late, his 15 seconds in the limelight came and went a long time ago.
Posted by: erick | December 17, 2011, 6:20 pm 6:20 pm
Ron Paul doesn’t like taxes and spending; however he adds earmarks so in case the spending bill passes with him opposed, his people get their fair share. Otherwise if the bill passed, his people would still get taxed but they wouldn’t get any money back. It’s like a tax credit, I hate the Income Tax but I still go after tax credits and refunds.
Posted by: Greg | December 17, 2011, 6:27 pm 6:27 pm
Can someone tell George Bush jr his 15 minutes ended….. Oops!
Posted by: jayc | December 17, 2011, 6:29 pm 6:29 pm
It’s telling that a executive power (Perry) is wining about Dr.Paul try to keep the money in the hands of the people and not the executive. Tells you what kind of president Perry would be….
Posted by: AJ187 | December 17, 2011, 6:53 pm 6:53 pm
Great job Ron Paul backers!
You are all so educated, informed and intelligent.
Keep up the great job. Peace and prosperity for All.
Posted by: harold | December 17, 2011, 7:09 pm 7:09 pm
Perry is against earmarks because they limit his ability to direct funds to crony capitalist friends. Check is record for the ETF funds in Texas – 40% of the awards went to college friends.
Paul wishes he never had to earmark funds, but once the money is approved it is his congressional duty to apportion fair funding to his districts – again his sworn job and should be the exact same responsibility for every congressman.
Posted by: Java McPhearson | December 17, 2011, 7:39 pm 7:39 pm
Did Rick Perry already forget about his ties to REAL special interest groups?! The State of Texas still remembers when you tried to force them to pay for millions of dollars in MANDATORY Gardasil vaccinations of teen-aged girls which would have benefited your biggest campaign contributor, Merck, to the tune of aforementioned millions. ‘People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.’
Posted by: Billy | December 17, 2011, 7:46 pm 7:46 pm
FOR THE LAST TIME (yeah right)…
Here is how earmarking works. Get it through your thick head, Rick Perry. The funding is appropriated, i.e., the pizza pie is already baked. You can’t take anything away by refusing to earmark. Earmarking allows for a representative to get a slice of the pizza for their own district (which was already taken from them in the form of taxation/fees). If your representative does not earmark, the money (already appropriated, remember?) goes to THE PRESIDENT. If Rick Perry (God forbid) were to win, that would mean that not earmarking would send money to HIM (Chief Executive) to spend as he saw fit.
If you walked past a yard sale and saw your stolen TV, wouldn’t you try to get it back?
Feel free to copy/paste this for any other ignorant Perry fans who do not understand how government works.
Ron Paul 2012.
Posted by: Oscar | December 17, 2011, 7:51 pm 7:51 pm
Not sure of Gingrichs background on earmarks..but I think Paul made himself pretty clear that he disapproves of the idea of lobbying for money for certain areas. But with the given system in place if you dont make a push to recieve trickle down money for your area, then you will essentially have nothing to give back to your area. Its lobby or nothing when it comes to federal funds for territories. Paul wants to change that system all together. Perry is making a last desperate ditch effort. I respect it but hes gotten it all wrong 95% of the campaign. Its attacks on others always come off as desperate and petty. He seems better fit to keep governing Texas.
Posted by: LT | December 17, 2011, 8:21 pm 8:21 pm
As has been said, earmarks are not the problem. In fact, they’re preferable. Earmarks show exactly where the money is being spent. Otherwise it just goes to the Executive branch to spend as it sees fit.
Posted by: Ronnie | December 17, 2011, 8:31 pm 8:31 pm
I saw Ron Paul response on this and it made total sense. It is the same thing I tell “The IRS system is really bad, it must be changed or ended”. Then I go there end of the year and apply for my tax refund and get it. I am lawfully using the system is in place. There is nothing wrong with that. Go Ron Paul.
Posted by: MrBrown | December 17, 2011, 8:40 pm 8:40 pm
I end up liking Perry a lot of the time, because he is just so unintelligent I can’t help but feel sorry for him. He tries, but he fails, and I wish I could pat him on the back and say “that’s okay, never give up.”
Posted by: james | December 17, 2011, 9:02 pm 9:02 pm
I dont think Perry would even pass high school grade. They guy is really in bad shape. Looks always drunk, forgets worse than my 91 year old grandma and can’t even finish one sentence in a proper english. He makes G. Bush look like Einstein.
Posted by: tokhir | December 17, 2011, 9:28 pm 9:28 pm
Why would a man who tries to copy everything Ron Paul says (except for Rick being a warmonger and bought by Big Pharm) want to go on the attack of his Idol, the great Dr. Paul?
Posted by: xFiFtyOnE | December 17, 2011, 9:30 pm 9:30 pm
So complain about Perry. Obama Stated he Would not sign bills
with earmarks in them. You can find his own words on You Tube
saying this. Or over 60,000 articles on Google with him saying this.
Just another politician not keeping his word. Tell me where I am Wrong.
Posted by: deadwrestler | December 17, 2011, 11:25 pm 11:25 pm
the truth on Ron Paul and earmarks: earmarks are added to legislation using already approved funds. I think it’s very admirable that Dr. Paul uses these earmarks as a chance to bring money, that he cannot stop from being spent, into his district. In the bigger picture though I believe Ron Paul is for getting rid of earmarks despite what Rick Perry said,
Posted by: Michael | December 18, 2011, 12:08 am 12:08 am
The quality of viewer comments are amazing. I love how comment sections carry more truth and information than the actual news article itself these days.
Posted by: Shaun | December 18, 2011, 12:09 am 12:09 am
Spending 2 million on bike racks, trash cans, and lights.. Is that the worst you can do? LMAO.. Even if he did earmark these things, so what?? He is spending our money on these we need! I like it! ROn Paul 2012!!!
Posted by: Marge | December 18, 2011, 12:16 am 12:16 am
OMG!!! This is awesome! Rick Perry Governor of the state of Texas, lambasts Ron Pual for getting taxpayer money back for projects to improve the community and surrounding areas, of Lake Jackson, IN TEXAS!!! Rick Perry, poor guy, I think he is only person in the world that could actually beat himself in an election.
Posted by: James | December 18, 2011, 12:32 am 12:32 am
Funny how a Governor of a state that recieved those funds is kicking the guy who sent them.
Posted by: ivykid | December 18, 2011, 12:40 am 12:40 am
I believe that Americans are tired of all the WARS and LIES.
Ron Paul has been speaking TRUTH to POWER for 35 years.
It is time for this GREAT NATION to CHANGE COURSE!
This is OUR COUNTRY, it is our DUTY to PRY it out of the HANDS of the ESTABLISMENT, and TAKE IT BACK!
STAND UP and do the RIGHT THING…
Vote for PEACE, LIBERTY and PROSPERITY.
Vote for RON PAUL 2012
Posted by: DollarNearDeath | December 18, 2011, 1:20 am 1:20 am
Paul is doing is job as a representative for his district. He is also doing the Constitutionally correct thing and appropriating the money (earmarks). Why is it there are still people out there that don’t understand this?
Posted by: Darren | December 18, 2011, 2:46 am 2:46 am
Iowa voters are not going to waste their votes for Ron and Gingrich , they are NOT electable.
Only Perry, with his strong records, can beat obama.
Posted by: nancy | December 18, 2011, 10:55 am 10:55 am
From Perry’s comments, you’d conclude that he doesn’t dedicate a huge and disproportionate portion of Texas’ largesse to his alma mater and to corporations and agencies affiliated with his “former aides” and advisors. Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, there is no criticism he can level at Washington or corrupt politicians that doesn’t have its parallel in Rick Perry’s Texas.
Posted by: davemaz | December 18, 2011, 10:30 pm 10:30 pm
I believe these Ron Paul supporters must be on hard drugs and never sleep. They live on the computers trying to say their guy is the greatest thing since sliced bread. They deny everything written about him even if there is video and recording and records to prove it as fact. It’s sick. Rick Perry is a man that is real and he can be trusted. I don’t trust Ron Paul. His son Rand makes sense unlike his Dad but Ron said” he would not allow Rand to run”. That was said when Ron was a guest on “The View” some months back.
Posted by: Joe | December 21, 2011, 11:18 pm 11:18 pm