[Cavalry Doc]

No better than the rest when it comes to feeding at the trough.


http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/20...family-affair/



Campaigning is a good way to provide for your family. Keep those money bombs rolling in.

[lancesorbenson]

Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc

No better than the rest when it comes to feeding at the trough.


http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/20...family-affair/



Campaigning is a good way to provide for your family. Keep those money bombs rolling in.

Nothing to see here. No tax dollars handed over to family, only voluntarily acquired campaign funds for actual work performed. My brother and I both worked for my dad. Very, very evil I know.

[CAcop]

Bill Lockyear here in CA dumped a ton of campaign money into his wife's campaign coffers. He is 70, she is 40. It gets better.

She goes into rehab for "an undisclosed chemical dependency." While in rehab she starts banging a guy her age who is in for meth use. It gets better.

The police get a 911 call from a hotel where they are engaged in a domestic dispute. He gets arrested. It gets better.

She signs in as his attorney so she can visit him for hours while he is in jail. It gets better.

The media got text messages between them somehow.

So much for continuing a political empire.

[certifiedfunds]

Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc

No better than the rest when it comes to feeding at the trough.


http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/20...family-affair/



Campaigning is a good way to provide for your family. Keep those money bombs rolling in.

Need more data to make a judgement.

Off the cuff it stinks. However, who do you trust more than your family to surround you?

Were they paid reasonable salaries and was legitimate work performed? Or were they enriching themselves off of political contributions. The article makes insinuations but doesn't offer enough to draw an informed conclusion.

I've reviewed Paul's disclosure documents. Though some here have suggested he's using politics to enrich himself, NOTHING on his disclosure document even hints at it.

[G-19]

Well, imagine that.

[Cavalry Doc]

Originally Posted by certifiedfunds

Need more data to make a judgement.

Off the cuff it stinks. However, who do you trust more than your family to surround you?

Were they paid reasonable salaries and was legitimate work performed? Or were they enriching themselves off of political contributions. The article makes insinuations but doesn't offer enough to draw an informed conclusion.

I've reviewed Paul's disclosure documents. Though some here have suggested he's using politics to enrich himself, NOTHING on his disclosure document even hints at it.

Nepotism used to be a bad thing. But everyone else is doing it, so why not?

It does appear that it's been lucrative.

[certifiedfunds]

Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc

Nepotism used to be a bad thing. But everyone else is doing it, so why not?

It does appear that it's been lucrative.

Nepotism isn't a bad thing. Nepotism in government is a bad thing. Nepotism in a business you don't own is a bad thing.

If it is as the article portrays, I agree to an extent. Like I said, paid excessively or not delivering the work associated with those positions, and I agree completely.

I see nothing to support the position the article asserts.

[Ruble Noon]

Isn't family values a tenet of conservatism?