Ron Paul: Libertarian Apostle

Pittsburgh City Paper ^ | SEPTEMBER 13, 2007 | CHARLIE DEITCH

[wideawake]

Just bookmarking for the record that KDD believes that Jose Padilla's civil rights were somehow violated by the US government.

[Badeye]

Ron Paul has never once demonstrated any ‘eroding of civil rights’ although he talks about it as though its ‘real’ in every speech.
Gun control laws?

He loves to talk in ‘theory’ but never finds the time to cite a specific, but I will admit I made a ‘too general’ statement. I should have confined it to his ranting about the Patriot Act.

He has yet to cite a single case to support his rants on that from what I’ve seen to date. Even h is supporters can’t come up with one, citing the Padilla case even though Ron Paul never has to my knowledge (even he knows better politically speaking).

[Xenalyte]

So, pointing out that Paul says one thing and votes for another, is being ‘nasty to his supporters’..hmmm...

Um, no. Calling us stupid names and telling us you don't need our votes to win would, I think, be more in line with Harvey's point.

[jmc813]

I should have confined it to his ranting about the Patriot Act.

What about all of the bull$hit drug war prosecutions under the Patriot Act? Unless you buy that dopey "if you but pot, you support terrorists" crap?

[mnehring]

Now Xena,
When have I ever called YOU a name? I recall specifically saying that you were one of the Paul types who support him because you are desperate for a return to Constitutional values and Paul talks about it more than others (later going into debate on if he walks the talk.)

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

But it's clear how Paul would vote on the matter if he were a state legislator: "The fetus is clearly a life," he said. "If you harm or injure a fetus you can be charged with a crime in this country under state laws. Abortion is the same thing."

TIME TO EAT CROW!!

[wideawake]

do you believe that a conservative can honestly and legitimately believe that the war in Iraq was a mistake and has worked to our disadvantage in the war on Islamic jihadism?

That's an interesting question, but it doesn't really relate to Ron Paul.

He has not only called our entry into Iraq a mistake, he has called it "illegal" and "unconstitutional" - essentially accusing the President of crime, treason and malfeasance.

Had he kept his remarks calm and sane, your question might be more on point, but it isn't.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

[Badeye]

No denying some law enforcement agencies misapplied the act, especially to justify the absurd war on pot.

If congress could pass a law that would eradicate a ‘weed’ none of us would have crab grass, and the pols would tout it every election cycle...(chuckle)

[jmc813]

Let me ask you...do you believe that a conservative can honestly and legitimately believe that the war in Iraq was a mistake and has worked to our disadvantage in the war on Islamic jihadism?

The war has nothing to do with the conservative/liberal spectrum. It's just that liberals happen to be wimpy pantywastes anyway and oppose it.

[wideawake]

TIME TO EAT CROW!!

Time for you to get a grip on reality. We all know Ron Paul likes to talk. He is a big talker - and a do-nothing.

He voted against prosecuting criminals who murder an unborn child in the course of a felony.

Ron Paul is not pro-life. He will agree to go along with criminalizing abortion if it occurs in state legislatures - that's about it.

Imagine if someone claimed to be pro-Second Amendment because they believed that the states had a right to grant shall-issue permits or not to grant them.

They would hardly be lauded as a Second Amendment warrior, but an opportunist who was willing to go along with whatever the local jurisdiction decided.

[mimaw]

RON PAUL:HORSES PETUTE

[jmc813]

Ron Paul is not pro-life. He will agree to go along with criminalizing abortion if it occurs in state legislatures - that's about it.

Short of an amendment to the Constitution, what the heck else could happen?

[trisham]

Ron Paul's voting record on Abortion

Voted NO on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines. (Jan 2007)

Voted NO on allowing human embryonic stem cell research. (May 2005)

Voted NO on restricting interstate transport of minors to get abortions. (Apr 2005)

Voted NO on making it a crime to harm a fetus during another crime. (Feb 2004)

Voted YES on banning partial-birth abortion except to save mother’s life. (Oct 2003)

Voted NO on forbidding human cloning for reproduction & medical research. (Feb 2003)

Voted YES on funding for health providers who don't provide abortion info. (Sep 2002)

Voted YES on banning Family Planning funding in US aid abroad. (May 2001)

Voted NO on federal crime to harm fetus while committing other crimes. (Apr 2001)

Voted YES on banning partial-birth abortions. (Apr 2000)

Voted NO on barring transporting minors to get an abortion. (Jun 1999)

[wideawake]

Short of an amendment to the Constitution, what the heck else could happen?

Congress could criminalize it and a Congressman (say Ron Paul) could sponsor a bill to significantly constrain the availability of abortion in the meantime.

Roe V. Wade needs to be challenged again and agian - sitting on our hands and hoping that one day it will magically go to the states is not an option, since every state law is gutted by the courts.

[jmc813]

Congress could criminalize it

Sigh. Why doesn't Congress just go ahead and criminalize all murder then? It is not the federal government's job to prosecute crime.

Roe V. Wade needs to be challenged again and agian - sitting on our hands and hoping that one day it will magically go to the states is not an option

I agree 100% and I'm sure Ron Paul does too. Unfortunately, it is difficult to have a case be revisited by the Supreme Court, but if we keep getting justices like the last two, it might be a possibility.

[wideawake]

It is not the federal government's job to prosecute crime.

So the Framers were unaware of the Constitution they wrote when they created the DOJ?

[mnehring]

Just an FYI, the DOJ was created in the 1870s. The framers did create the Attorney General position in 1789 (with the Judiciary Act that created the Federal Court system) but it was a prosecution only position.

[wideawake]

the DOJ was created in the 1870s

It's just an extension of the Attorney General's office.

I could also say the Framers started a DOD, only it was the Secretariat of War then.

[MEGoody]

Whenever our leaders tell us there's going to be a declaration of war, you'd better look out because that usually means it's going to be a declaration of war against our liberties.

What an idiot.