RON PAUL is the RIGHT Candidate for Pro-Life social conservatives.
- Ron Paul introduced the Sanctity of Life Act of 2005, recognizing the Personhood of every unborn baby and removing Abortion from the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. ("THE RIGHT TO LIFE ACT OF 2005 Lacks Vital Language").
- Ron Paul is rated ZERO percent by the National Abortion Rights Action League.
- Ron Paul is an original co-sponsor of the Marriage Protection Act.
- Ron Paul voted to ban Homosexual adoption in Washington DC.
RON PAUL is the RIGHT Candidate for Tax-Cutting fiscal conservatives.
- Ron Paul is ranked by Human Events as the biggest Tax Cutter in all of Congress. Paul Named #1 Tax Cutter in Congress: (Paul) is a co-sponsor
of a constitutional amendment to repeal the 16th amendment and end income, gift, and estate taxes. Regularly pushes for tax cuts. Sponsor of bills to allow tax credits for private school tuition, to permit tax deduction of college tuition, and to stop all taxation of Social Security benefits. Opposes all unconstitutional spending programs.
- Ron Paul has placed either 1st or 2nd in the National Taxpayer Union rankings every year he has been in Congress -- thus standing head and shoulders above his big government Republican rivals like gun-grabber John McCain, transvestite Rudy Giuliani, "Amnesty Sam" Brownback, Mike "Bill Clinton embodies the American Dream" Huckabee, and Pork-Barrel King Duncan Hunter (whose abysmal 52% rating from the National Taxpayer's Union is actually bringing the average Republican score in the loose-spending House down).
RON PAUL is the ONLY 100% Anti-Terrorist candidate.
- The ruling government of Iraq is dominated by the psychopathic gang of murderers known as the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI) and the Islamic Al Dawa Party, who are the very same Islamic Terrorist Parties which bombed the US & French Embassies in Kuwait and murdered 241 United States Marines in Beirut in 1983. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, of the Al Dawa Party, was the Al Dawa bureau chief in Damascus in the 1980s and was thus heavily responsible for Al Dawa operations in Beirut, while parliament member Jamal Jafaar Mohammed of his ruling coalition is one of the "Kuwait 17", still under a Kuwaiti death sentence (in absentia) for his direct involvement in the vicious attack on the US Embassy in Kuwait! Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate calling for an immediate END to all Military and Financial support for the criminal Islamic Terrorist thug-regime of Iraq.
RON PAUL is the RIGHT Candidate for National Defense and Foreign Affairs.
- Ron Paul voted for the National Missile Defense Act. source
- Ron Paul is one of only two co-sponsors of H. Res. 123, for the establishment of a Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs to "conduct a full investigation of all unresolved matters relating to any United States personnel unaccounted for from the Vietnam era, the Korean conflict, World War II, Cold War Missions, or Gulf War, including MIA's and POW's." (POW-MIA InterNetwork)
- Ron Paul supports a strengthened Coast Guard and increased port security, and increased benefits for veterans.
- Ron Paul advocates United States withdrawal from the United Nations and withdrawal from the World Trade Organization. Says Ron Paul: "We dont need CAFTA or any other international agreement to reap the economic benefits promised by CAFTA supporters, we only need to change our own harmful economic and tax policies. Let the rest of the world hurt their citizens with tariffs; if we simply reduce tariffs and taxes at home, we will attract capital and see our economy flourish." (source).
RON PAUL is the RIGHT Candidate for the Bill of Rights.
RON PAUL is the RIGHT Candidate on Illegal Immigration.
- Ron Paul voted for the Secure Fence Act of 2006. Amnesty for lawbreakers is not the answer, and its time to rethink birthright citizenship, Paul added. ("Paul Votes for Stronger Border Security")
- Ron Paul is a co-sponsor of HR 487, which "expresses the sense of Congress that the United States should not engage in the construction of a NAFTA superhighway or enter into any plans to create a North American Union between Canada, the U.S., and Mexico."
- "We need to allocate far more resources, both in terms of money and manpower, to securing our borders and coastlines here at home. This is the most critical task before us, both in terms of immigration problems and the threat of foreign terrorists. Unless and until we secure our borders, illegal immigration and the problems associated with it will only increase." Ron Paul (source)
RON PAUL is the ONLY socially-conservative Candidate defending the independence of the Christian Church from Federal "Faith-Based Socialism".
- "Government funding of religious organizations will transform them into adjuncts of the federal welfare state, more concerned about obeying federal rules and regulations than fulfilling the obligations of their faith." Ron Paul (source). Every other so-called "social conservative" candidate actually FAVORS this underhanded Orwellian Federal assault on the Freedom of the Christian Church.
RON PAUL. The RIGHT Candidate for a FREE Republic.
Please let me know if you would like to be added to the
Great Ron Paul Ping List (GRPPL), already developing support on the Free Republic Religion Forum.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-67 next last
To: Gamecock; elkfersupper; dcwusmc; gnarledmaw; Extremely Extreme Extremist; KoRn; traviskicks; ...
Ron Paul for President! (Ping to current GRPPL members)
2 posted on
02/20/2007 9:00:38 AM PST by
OrthodoxPresbyterian
(We are Unworthy Servants; We have only done Our Duty -- Luke 17:10)
To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
Ron Paul should be the rule, not the execption.
3 posted on
02/20/2007 9:01:36 AM PST by
isthisnickcool
(Have a nice day. Durka durka durka...)
To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
Note: The source in the "Pro-Life" section refers to Duncan Hunter's flawed "Right to Life Act", in contrast to Ron Paul's better-written "Sanctity of Life Act".
5 posted on
02/20/2007 9:02:38 AM PST by
OrthodoxPresbyterian
(We are Unworthy Servants; We have only done Our Duty -- Luke 17:10)
To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
Ron Paul turned his back on the troops.
6 posted on
02/20/2007 9:03:22 AM PST by
bnelson44
(Proud parent of a tanker! (Elections have repercussions, you reap what you sow.))
To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
Ron Paul
voted with the Democrats on the "non-binding resolution" on Iraq.
He is political "dead meat" as far as I'm concerned.
Were you aware of this and didn't give a hoot or are you just pushing damaged goods?
8 posted on
02/20/2007 9:03:42 AM PST by
capt. norm
(Liberalism = cowardice disguised as tolerance.)
To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
An incorruptible man of principle Except, of course, when it means keeping his word on term limits.
Then he reveals himself to be as corruptible as any member of Congress.
To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
Ron Paul is anything but a Republican.
If anything, he is a traditional Whig but he does not even meet those criteria.
He is a Libertarian by most modern standards, and a royal pain in the arse.
To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
I'd like to see Ron Paul as President, but I'd accept him as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, too.
14 posted on
02/20/2007 9:06:36 AM PST by
mysterio
To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
And whether someone stabs our fighting men in the back out of principle or for money, I don't much care what motivated him to become evil.
Ron Paul is still a contemptible scumbag.
To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
I got to admit that I like him on most issues but then he went and stood with the Democrats on the "surrender" vote. He may have had his own reasons but he still let himself be counted for their argument. I can't forgive that.
20 posted on
02/20/2007 9:10:37 AM PST by
Gator101
To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
"Does the Constitution authorize Congress to pass this law?" Most of the time, the answer to that question is "no." And so Paul votes accordingly.
Indeed.
24 posted on
02/20/2007 9:11:26 AM PST by
WhiteGuy
(GOP Congress - 16,000 earmarks costing US $50 billion in 2006 - PAUL2008)
To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
No doubt Ron Paul is fantastic. What we love about him is what makes him so unelectable though. Imagining what a RP presidency would look like sure makes me smile.
26 posted on
02/20/2007 9:11:36 AM PST by
Clump
(Your family may not be safe, but at least their library records will be.)
To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
Historically, with one exception, American's don't elect congress critters to be president.
You may be wasting bandwidth - but he is a better choice than ole Rudy.
29 posted on
02/20/2007 9:13:07 AM PST by
WorkerbeeCitizen
(Religion of peace my arse - We need a maintenance Crusade - piss on Islam)
To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
Put me on the ping list. Paul is da man!
To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
Intrigued...please add me to the GRPPL!
Thanks~
keeper
37 posted on
02/20/2007 9:15:57 AM PST by
keeper53
( "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose." Jim Elliot)
To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
Ron Paul is truly a decent man. However, I strongly disagree with him on his Iraq vote. I realize that a candidate cannot give you everything that I want, but -to me- he just made a mistake on the most important issue of our time.
49 posted on
02/20/2007 9:19:24 AM PST by
Bishop_Malachi
(Liberal Socialism - A philosophy which advocates spreading a low standard of living equally.)
To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
Didn't Ron Paul just vote with the Democraticks on this stupid "Iraq Resolution"?
To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
We used to live in Ron Paul's district and we still own a ranch there. We moved about the time he first ran for congress. Ron Paul was, and still is a NUT!
64 posted on
02/20/2007 9:22:53 AM PST by
Ditter
To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
Sorry but Ron Paul isn't my kind of guy. While he may have some good things about him, the fact that he's totally inflexible on so many things and prides himself in being the Lone Ranger on a lot of things (though by no means because he's the most conservative) has thoroughly disenchanted me with him.
To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
IMO, he is right on everything except the war on Islamic fascism. I know he will not horse-trade on issues...his campaign does not stand much of a chance so long as he advocates cutting troop funding while armed forces personnel are in a theater of war. FWIW, I agreed with him right up until boots were on the ground in Iraq. Afghanistan, on the other hand, leaves a wide gulf between the two of us:
"Obviously, we are not putting forth the full effort required to capture Osama bin Laden. Instead, our occupation of Afghanistan further inflames the Muslim radicals that came of age with their fierce resistance to the Soviet occupation of a Muslim country. Our occupation merely serves as a recruiting device for al-Qaeda, which has promised retaliation for our presence in their country. We learned nothing after first allying ourselves with Osama bin Laden when he applied this same logic toward the Soviets. The net result of our invasion and occupation of Afghanistan has been to miss capturing bin Laden, assist al-Qaeda's recruitment, stimulate more drug production, lose hundreds of American lives, and allow spending billions of American taxpayer dollars with no end in sight."
Since 2001 we have spent over $300 billion occupying Afghanistan and Iraq. Were poorer but certainly not safer for it. We removed the Taliban from power in Afghanistan much to the delight of the Iranians, who consider the Taliban an archenemy. Warlords now control the country, operating a larger drug trade than ever before.
Similarly in Iraq, our ouster of Saddam Hussein will allow the majority Shia to claim leadership title if Iraqs election actually leads to an organized government. This delights the Iranians, who are close allies of the Iraqi Shia.
Talk about unintended consequences! This war has produced chaos, civil war, death and destruction, and huge financial costs. It has eliminated two of Irans worst enemies, and placed power in Iraq with Irans best friends. Even this apparent failure of policy does nothing to restrain the current march toward a similar confrontation with Iran. What will it take for us to learn from our failures?
.
Within US borders, Ron Paul is exactly what America needs. On the other hand, his foreign policy views, for all matters other than trade, are not my own. Not wanting to start wars is one thing. What to do once we are knee-deep is another.
70 posted on
02/20/2007 9:25:24 AM PST by
M203M4
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-67 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson