Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ron Paul's stance on Education Spending (HR 1056 - Family Education Freedom Act)
House of Representatives ^ | February 14, 2007 | Rep. Ron Paul

Posted on 06/09/2007 5:40:59 PM PDT by Remember_Salamis

Family Education Freedom Act of 2007 (Introduced in House)

HR 1056 IH

110th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 1056

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow individuals a credit against income tax for tuition and related expenses for public and nonpublic elementary and secondary education.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

February 14, 2007

Mr. PAUL (for himself, Mr. FEENEY, Mr. RUSH, and Mr. SENSENBRENNER) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow individuals a credit against income tax for tuition and related expenses for public and nonpublic elementary and secondary education.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Family Education Freedom Act of 2007'.

SEC. 2. CREDIT FOR TUITION AND RELATED EXPENSES FOR PUBLIC AND NONPUBLIC ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION.

(a) In General- Subpart A of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to nonrefundable personal credits) is amended by inserting after section 25D the following new section:

`SEC. 25E. TUITION AND RELATED EXPENSES FOR PUBLIC AND NONPUBLIC ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION.

`(a) Allowance of Credit- In the case of an individual, there shall be allowed as a credit against the tax imposed by this chapter for the taxable year an amount equal to the qualified educational expenses paid during such taxable year for the elementary or secondary education of any dependent (as defined in section 152) of the taxpayer at a qualified educational institution.

`(b) Limitation- The credit allowed by this section shall not exceed $5,000 per student for any taxable year.

`(c) Definitions- For purposes of this section--

`(1) QUALIFIED EDUCATIONAL EXPENSES- The term `qualified educational expenses' means cost of attendance in connection with the elementary or secondary education of the student at a qualified educational institution. Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary, rules similar to the rules relating to cost of attendance (within the meaning of section 472 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1087ll) (as in effect on the date of the enactment of this paragraph) shall apply for purposes of the preceding sentence.

`(2) QUALIFIED EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION- The term `qualified educational institution' means any educational institution (including any private, parochial, religious, or home school) organized for the purpose of providing elementary or secondary education, or both.

`(d) Cost-of-Living Adjustment-

`(1) IN GENERAL- In the case of any taxable year beginning in a calendar year after 2007, the $5,000 amount contained in subsection (b) shall be increased by an amount equal to--

`(A) $5,000, multiplied by

`(B) the cost-of-living adjustment determined under section 1(f)(3) for the calendar year in which the taxable year begins by substituting `calendar year 2006' for `calendar year 1992' in subparagraph (B) thereof.

`(2) ROUNDING- If any increase determined under paragraph (1) is not a multiple of $10, such increase shall be rounded to the next highest multiple of $10. In the case of a married individual (as determined under section 7703) filing a separate return, the preceding sentence shall be applied by substituting `$5' for `$10' each place it appears.

`(e) Regulations- The Secretary shall prescribe regulations to carry out this section, including regulations providing for claiming the credit under this section on Form 1040EZ.'.

(b) Clerical Amendment- The table of sections for subpart A of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of such Code is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 25D the following new item:

`Sec. 25E. Tuition and related expenses for public and nonpublic elementary and secondary education.'.

(c) Effective Date- The amendments made by this section shall apply to amounts paid in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2006.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Philosophy; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2008; amnesty; election; libertarians; medicalmarijuana; paul; ronpaul; socialism
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-94 next last
Some of the dimwitted FReepers out there, like MNJohnnie and Perdogg, have accused Dr. Paul of calling for increased government spending on Education and Health Care.

On the Contrary, he has called for the largest tax cut in American History -- a bill to give up to a $5,000 tax credit for every child pulled out of public school.

1 posted on 06/09/2007 5:41:01 PM PDT by Remember_Salamis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Remember_Salamis

L Ron Paul postings are a waste of electrons.


2 posted on 06/09/2007 5:43:58 PM PDT by Drango (A liberal's compassion is limited only by the size of someone else's wallet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Remember_Salamis

A cut & run Republican is worse than a liberal.


3 posted on 06/09/2007 5:48:00 PM PDT by alice_in_bubbaland (I will respect illegal aliens civil rights, when they respect the sovereignty of the US!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Drango

don’t care about the tax cuts huh?

I imagine you’d support a socialist like Lieberman as long as they remained in Iraq...


4 posted on 06/09/2007 5:49:09 PM PDT by Remember_Salamis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: alice_in_bubbaland

You have no principles.

You prefer left-wing Wilsonian foreign policy adventures over a true conservative.


5 posted on 06/09/2007 5:49:50 PM PDT by Remember_Salamis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Remember_Salamis

Shouldn’t you ping those you have included in a post?


6 posted on 06/09/2007 5:50:31 PM PDT by leadpenny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Remember_Salamis

If Ron Paul cares so much about children, then why doesn’t he take a strong pro-life stance like a ‘true conservative’ should?


7 posted on 06/09/2007 5:52:58 PM PDT by DugwayDuke (A patriot will cast their vote in the manner most likely to deny power to democrats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Remember_Salamis
Some of the dimwitted FReepers out there, like MNJohnnie and Perdogg,

SEE:

Please enjoy our forum, but also please remember to use common courtesy when posting and refrain from posting personal attacks, profanity, vulgarity, threats, racial or religious bigotry, or any other materials offensive or otherwise inappropriate for a conservative family audience.

Naughty-Naughty-Naughty!

8 posted on 06/09/2007 5:52:59 PM PDT by SandRat (Duty, Honor, Country. What else needs to be said?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Remember_Salamis
have accused Dr. Paul of calling for increased government spending on Education and Health Care.

LOL, Ron Paul? More government spending? Wow, getting desparate trying to defame the good doctor aren't they? Dr. Paul is one of the few limited government conservatives left in the party and his campaign is the only reason I am maintaining my voter registration as Republican.

I do wonder however after September what good 'conservatives' will do when some of the others left in the race begin to waver on keeping troops in Iraq indefinitely...

9 posted on 06/09/2007 5:53:14 PM PDT by billbears (Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it. --Santayana)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Remember_Salamis

Lol. Ron Paul is bad on foreign policy, Lieberman is bad on internal polic. We aren’t even in a situation to chose between Lieberman and Paul. I just love (well actually not) the Paulistas’ scare scenarios.

We have plenty of good choices.
I don’t need to make compromises between tax cuts and a pro-victory foreign policy.


10 posted on 06/09/2007 5:53:27 PM PDT by SolidWood (3,184 terrorists killed since January 2007)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Remember_Salamis; MNJohnnie

Please, let’s have a civil debate - we can disagree without being disagreeable. I don’t want anyone banned because he or she supports RP,JM, or RG, but let’s be civil. I am not dimwitted, I have a degree in Electrical Engineering. I commend RP for this legislation.

Ron Paul said what he said in the debate. He wants to amend it or make it clear, by all means do so.


11 posted on 06/09/2007 5:54:10 PM PDT by Perdogg (congratulations - you have just won an ipod nano)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: leadpenny

I saw it, it doesn’t bother me.


12 posted on 06/09/2007 5:54:57 PM PDT by Perdogg (congratulations - you have just won an ipod nano)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: billbears

I pointed out what Ron Paul said in the debate. If he misspoke, he should modify his comments.


13 posted on 06/09/2007 5:56:18 PM PDT by Perdogg (congratulations - you have just won an ipod nano)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: DugwayDuke

109th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 776
To provide that human life shall be deemed to exist from conception.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

February 10, 2005

Mr. PAUL (for himself, Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey, and Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary


A BILL
To provide that human life shall be deemed to exist from conception.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Sanctity of Life Act of 2005’.

SEC. 2. FINDING AND DECLARATION.

(a) Finding- The Congress finds that present day scientific evidence indicates a significant likelihood that actual human life exists from conception.

(b) Declaration- Upon the basis of this finding, and in the exercise of the powers of the Congress—

(1) the Congress declares that—

(A) human life shall be deemed to exist from conception, without regard to race, sex, age, health, defect, or condition of dependency; and

(B) the term `person’ shall include all human life as defined in subparagraph (A); and

(2) the Congress recognizes that each State has the authority to protect lives of unborn children residing in the jurisdiction of that State.

SEC. 3. LIMITATION ON APPELLATE JURISDICTION.

(a) In General- Chapter 81 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

`Sec. 1260. Appellate jurisdiction; limitation
`Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 1253, 1254, and 1257, the Supreme Court shall not have jurisdiction to review, by appeal, writ of certiorari, or otherwise, any case arising out of any statute, ordinance, rule, regulation, practice, or any part thereof, or arising out of any act interpreting, applying, enforcing, or effecting any statute, ordinance, rule, regulation, or practice, on the grounds that such statute, ordinance, rule, regulation, practice, act, or part thereof—

`(1) protects the rights of human persons between conception and birth; or

`(2) prohibits, limits, or regulates—

`(A) the performance of abortions; or

`(B) the provision of public expense of funds, facilities, personnel, or other assistance for the performance of abortions.’.

(b) Conforming Amendment- The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 81 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

`1260. Appellate jurisdiction; limitation.’.

SEC. 4. LIMITATION ON DISTRICT COURT JURISDICTION.

(a) In General- Chapter 85 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

`Sec. 1370. Limitation on jurisdiction
`Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the district courts shall not have jurisdiction of any case or question which the Supreme Court does not have jurisdiction to review under section 1260 of this title.’.

(b) Conforming Amendment- The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 85 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

`1370. Limitation on jurisdiction.’.

SEC. 5. EFFECTIVE DATE.

The provisions of this Act shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act, and shall apply to any case pending on such date of enactment.

SEC. 6. SEVERABILITY.

If any provision of this Act or the amendments made by this Act, or the application of this Act or such amendments to any person or circumstance is determined by a court to be invalid, the validity of the remainder of this Act and the amendments made by this Act and the application of such provision to other persons and circumstances shall not be affected by such determination.


14 posted on 06/09/2007 6:03:07 PM PDT by KDD (Ron Paul for President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: DugwayDuke

“If Ron Paul cares so much about children, then why doesn’t he take a strong pro-life stance like a ‘true conservative’ should?”

He does:

http://www.commentaryusa.com/commentary/politics/pro-life-leader-endorses-ron-paul.html


15 posted on 06/09/2007 6:03:29 PM PDT by gas0linealley (.good fences make good neighbors)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Drango

“L Ron Paul postings are a waste of electrons.”

Doesn’t matter, electrons like him.


16 posted on 06/09/2007 6:05:36 PM PDT by gas0linealley (.good fences make good neighbors)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Remember_Salamis

I’d like to understand Ron Paul’s votes against the bulk of legislation to protect children from pedophiles, pornographers, and other criminals. When I search the Washington Post archive for legislation, Ron Paul is often the only vote against such legislation. Why is that?


17 posted on 06/09/2007 6:06:16 PM PDT by ridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ridge
When I search the Washington Post archive for legislation, Ron Paul is often the only vote against such legislation. Why is that?

Because in many of the instances, the Constitution does not provide the power for the federal government to become involved. Dr. Paul has stated before there are bills he would like to vote for but he understands the Constitution does not give the federal government that power.

18 posted on 06/09/2007 6:09:01 PM PDT by billbears (Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it. --Santayana)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: alice_in_bubbaland

“A cut & run Republican is worse than a liberal”

Iraqi leaders aren’t stupid, why should they pay for policing their country if we’ll do it for them at no cost?


19 posted on 06/09/2007 6:09:49 PM PDT by gas0linealley (.good fences make good neighbors)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Remember_Salamis

LOL! Spare me. I have plenty of conservative values...Reagan ones. What part of Strong National Defense/National Security don’t you understand.

I will never vote for that POS, so don’t waste your breath.


20 posted on 06/09/2007 6:12:23 PM PDT by alice_in_bubbaland (I will respect illegal aliens civil rights, when they respect the sovereignty of the US!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Remember_Salamis

When it comes to domestic policy Ron Paul is a solid conservative. I think most FReepers would agree with that.

But, it’s his foreign policy that causes him to stay stagnant in the polls at 1 or 2%. An anti-war and anti-Israel candidate just isn’t going to win the Republican nomination, especially in a post-9/11 world.


21 posted on 06/09/2007 6:14:23 PM PDT by West Coast Conservative (Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ridge
Ron Paul believes that violations of the Constitutional authority of the Federal Government is wrong even when the causes under which it might do so are just. He is a strict Constitutional originalist.

“If, in the opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed.” —
George Washington, Farewell Address, 1796

22 posted on 06/09/2007 6:14:28 PM PDT by KDD (Ron Paul for President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Remember_Salamis

After listening to this dimwit blame our country for 9/11 its hard to get excited about anything this man says.


23 posted on 06/09/2007 6:22:16 PM PDT by plain talk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Remember_Salamis

Ron Paul would make a great President.

If it were 1901.


24 posted on 06/09/2007 6:24:59 PM PDT by mkjessup (Jan 20, 2009 - "We Don't Know. Where Rudy Went. Just Glad He's Not. The President. Burma Shave.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: alice_in_bubbaland

I guess I don’t understand the part about spreadin’ “demokracee” around the world for sh*ts and giggles.


25 posted on 06/09/2007 6:28:56 PM PDT by Remember_Salamis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Remember_Salamis

IMHO, the absolute worst thing about this bill is that it let’s the camel’s (government’s) nose under the tent of all private schools and home schoolers. If this thing should pass, the government could soon be telling private schools what they can and cannot teach.


26 posted on 06/09/2007 6:29:22 PM PDT by basil (Support the Second Amendment--buy another gun today!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KDD

“Ron Paul believes that violations of the Constitutional authority of the Federal Government is wrong even when the causes under which it might do so are just. He is a strict Constitutional originalist.”

Originalist? Even the original authors of the consitution were not like this. If they were we would not have:

-Religious services being held in the capital building while Washington DC was being built.
-Congressional chaplains around since the beginning of the federation
-The Lousiana purchase

One can go on and on an on with examples. And as you point out: Ron Paul’s extremism does not lead to justice as his votes against children and civil rights prove.


27 posted on 06/09/2007 6:32:19 PM PDT by bnelson44 (http://www.appealforcourage.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Remember_Salamis

Irony:

Running off Rudy supporters and getting a multitude of Ron Paul whack jobs.


28 posted on 06/09/2007 6:33:24 PM PDT by rwilson99 (Al Gore causes Global Cooling.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mkjessup

If it were 1901....

My arguement is that he would not have made a good president even then. I don’t know any president in our history who is as much an extremist as Ron Paul is.


29 posted on 06/09/2007 6:34:04 PM PDT by bnelson44 (http://www.appealforcourage.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative

He’s anti-war all right, but not anti-Israel; he’s Israeli-neutral.

He condemned last summer’s attacks on Lebanon, primarily because the attacks on Lebanese infrastructure were pointless, unjust, and self-defeating (why the heck did they bomb infrastructure targets anyway?). The attacks also resulted in a lot of dead Lebanese Christians, which pro-Israel evangelicals also ignore. How can Christians support Israeli actions that hurt Palestinian and Lebanese Christians, which number 15% and 35% of their respective populations?

But Ron Paul has also said that Iran wouldn’t dare to attack Israel, as the Israelis have the ability to “mop the floor” with Iran.


30 posted on 06/09/2007 6:36:27 PM PDT by Remember_Salamis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: ridge
When I search the Washington Post archive for legislation, Ron Paul is often the only vote against such legislation. Why is that?

Because he opposes any legislation that doesn't pass Constitutional muster or has bogus earmarks attached.

All laws have two uses. The one for which it is intended and one for which it is not. In other words, the Law of Unintended Consequences. It's the unintended consequences of bad law that are eroding our liberty.

A good example is the Port Security Bill. The Unlawful Internet Gambling Act was stealthily attached to the Port Security Bill. It is bad law that steals another liberty.
.
31 posted on 06/09/2007 6:39:12 PM PDT by radioman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Remember_Salamis
When you try to isolate an enemy to southern Lebanon you bomb bridges and other infrastructure they can use to escape north. You bomb infrastructure in the northern border and port towns so the enemy is not reinforced. When all that was halted then Israel started to lose the war in Lebanon.

Since when is Paul a military tactician anyway?

32 posted on 06/09/2007 6:41:16 PM PDT by bnelson44 (http://www.appealforcourage.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: bnelson44

The Israeli Government has condemned its own actions in the war as pure buffoonery. Some say its because the Chief of staff was a “Blue Suiter” and thought Air Power could win.


33 posted on 06/09/2007 6:44:14 PM PDT by Remember_Salamis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Drango

I am thinking that Ron Paul is the only candidate that says what I am thinking. I am pretty much fed up with the rest of the candidates. I am thinking of getting VERY involved in his campaign work. He has an office here in town and he comes to my Christmas parties.


34 posted on 06/09/2007 6:44:49 PM PDT by buffyt (I hope it gets a little warmer up north. Iíve always wanted to hunt polar bears but it's too cold!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: buffyt

and he comes to my Christmas parties???


35 posted on 06/09/2007 6:46:25 PM PDT by bnelson44 (http://www.appealforcourage.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Remember_Salamis
They were doing OK until they stopped the assault and left their forces as sitting ducks without orders because of hesitation at the top. Paul doesn't care about any of this though, he has turned anti-Israel and pro-Truther.
36 posted on 06/09/2007 6:48:48 PM PDT by bnelson44 (http://www.appealforcourage.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: bnelson44

The only real way for the Israelis to stop the problem is to conduct counter-Hizbollah raids whenever rocket attacks start up.

Move in — Clear out — move back.

Occupation doesn’t work, and bombing only increases Hizbollah’s support.


37 posted on 06/09/2007 6:51:10 PM PDT by Remember_Salamis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: alice_in_bubbaland
It saddens me to see FreeRepublic now dominated by Republicans as opposed to conservatives. I don’t care how invested you are in the Iraq war, Ron Paul takes his oath to protect and defend the Constitution more seriously than any other congress-critter out there.
38 posted on 06/09/2007 6:52:55 PM PDT by gorush (Exterminate the Moops!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Remember_Salamis

Just one important message to everyone out there who is seriously supporting Dr. Paul for president. Don’t get distracted arguing with folks online. Take the fight out to the real world. Go grab a bumper sticker and put it on your car. Participate in the meet-up groups to get brochures and pass them out. I for one, am tired of hearing this “internet phenomenon” crap. Lets show the world there is real support for this man.


39 posted on 06/09/2007 7:01:53 PM PDT by JJTHEBULL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ridge

Ron Paul believes that that is not up to the federal government. It should be up to each individual state.


40 posted on 06/09/2007 7:13:41 PM PDT by abigailsmybaby (I was born with nothing. So far I have most of it left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Remember_Salamis

Israel should not have given up Gaza. Now they are suffering from that decision. If they give up the Golan they will suffer more.


41 posted on 06/09/2007 7:30:34 PM PDT by bnelson44 (http://www.appealforcourage.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: JJTHEBULL

The support Paul has is with Libertarians, Pro-Hemp groups and Truthers. He has shown us that over and over again. He has no real Republican support, coming in at between 1% and 0% in most Republican polls.


42 posted on 06/09/2007 7:36:08 PM PDT by bnelson44 (http://www.appealforcourage.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: bnelson44

“I don’t know any President in our history who is as much an extremist as Ron Paul is”.
Try George Washington and Thomas Jefferson.
BTW, Paul is my Congressman and I’m proud to vote for him.


43 posted on 06/09/2007 7:43:57 PM PDT by BnBlFlag (Deo Vindice/Semper Fidelis "Ya gotta saddle up your boys; Ya gotta draw a hard line")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: basil

You are exactly right; that is what a VOUCHER would do, and that is why Ron Paul is opposed to vouchers.

This allows taxpayers to write off education expenses up to $5,000, with a dollar-for-dollar refund (instead of just a deduction).

Big difference.


44 posted on 06/09/2007 8:01:15 PM PDT by Remember_Salamis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: JJTHEBULL

I’ve got my first Omahans for Ron Paul Meetup Group on the 13th; can’t wait.


45 posted on 06/09/2007 8:02:40 PM PDT by Remember_Salamis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: bnelson44

Any proof, or just pulling it out of your a*s?


46 posted on 06/09/2007 8:04:01 PM PDT by Remember_Salamis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Remember_Salamis

You have a legitimate poll that shows Paul scoring more than “0”? Post it then.

http://www.galluppoll.com/content/?ci=27598

“Other” and “none” scores more points than Paul. LOL


47 posted on 06/09/2007 8:27:05 PM PDT by Drango (A liberal's compassion is limited only by the size of someone else's wallet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Remember_Salamis
It's this simple:

Ron Paul elected: More freedom.

ANYONE ELSE elected: Less freedom.

You "conservatives" who don't support Dr. Paul because he won't sign on to your endless war or endlessly-growing government are a big part of the problem. Stop caring for your "team" (who BTW have betrayed everything you stand for in every way possible) and start caring about your country.

48 posted on 06/09/2007 8:29:06 PM PDT by Jonathon Spectre (Nazis believed they were doing good.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: billbears
Dr. Paul is one of the few limited government conservatives
Wasn't he ... did he belong to ... didn't he first come out as ...

A LIBERTARIAN?

So ... why the continual 'white-wash' now?

.

.

An aside: These people call themselves 'conservative' because they get NO traction among their core base, the Alex Joneses of the world ...

49 posted on 06/09/2007 8:35:59 PM PDT by _Jim (Highly recommended book on the Kennedy assassination - Posner: "Case Closed")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Jonathon Spectre
Ron Paul elected:

LOL.

50 posted on 06/09/2007 8:41:49 PM PDT by Moonman62 (The issue of whether cheap labor makes America great should have been settled by the Civil War.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-94 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson