Posted on 05/12/2009 1:27:12 PM PDT by Captain Kirk
Those aren’t my words. They’re the words of a Riverside (Calif.) Press-Enterprise blog title under which journalist Ben Goad explains Paul’s vote last month against awarding Palmer the Congressional Gold Medal for his lifelong achievement in the game of golf. The tally was 422-1. The former presidential aspirant and presiding Texas Republican from the 14th District southwest of Houston was the only congressman to cast a vote against the distinction.
Well then. I suppose he’ll never make officer in Arnie’s Army.
Goad quoted Paul spokeswoman Rachel Mills:
“It is certainly nothing personal against Mr. Palmer. In fact, Congressman Paul admires him greatly. Dr. Paul opposes using public monies for any and all of these gold medals given to private citizens, just on principle. Not to mention, it is unconstitutional to use taxpayer dollars in this way. He even suggested on the House Floor before he voted against Rosa Parks’s medal that if it meant so much to the Members of Congress, why not fund the award out of their own pockets? He pulled $100 out of his own wallet, but had no other takers. At a time like this when all budgets are stretched so thin, it seems especially inappropriate to lavish gifts like this on private citizens, as much as he may admire the individual.”
(Excerpt) Read more at statesman.com ...
.
I could support this man in many areas, not all! But for his rabid supporters, it’s them I can’t stand. I usually avoid all discussion about him
RON PAUL IS AN ANTI-PALMIST!!! THEY SAID SO ON STORMFRONT!!!
/anti-Libertarian frothing-at-the-mouth GOPbot
Do you support him in “this area?” If so, no other member of Congress agrees with you. Again, Paul is a giant among pygmies.
Yea.. Piss on all the people in this country who are dedicated and passionate about restoring the U.S. Constitution to its rightful place.
Before the election, Ron Paul was INSANELY popular for his libertarian ideals.
During the election, he and Alan Keyes were the only Republicans that had the balls to tell it like it is to the “Black Debates” (whatever it was called). Other Republicans showed up, but they were cowed by the moderator (Tavis Smiley) and the crowd (guess).
His anti-war stance earned him a lot of scorn (I didn’t support him on that, either), but he isn’t he nutjob he’s made out to be. Some of his most fervent fans made that tag possible.
I applaud him for sticking firm and consistent to his principles.
And Arnold Palmer is a great golfer and human being.
Truther! Shrimp! Votes against his own earmarks! Unsavory people like him! Named his son after a lunatic! Wants to delay the second coming!
Its to bad that Palmer doesn’t eat more shrimp.
By the way, pulling out a $100 bill to personally fund the motion was wonderful. It was the best way to show his true sentiments to his fellow congressmen and the voters. Its sad (but not all that surprising) that he had no takers.
When Paul actually proposes to get rid of a Federal Department, then I’ll be impressed with him. I just can’t support a person who left the GOP in 88 cause of Ronald Reagan..
Ron Paul has proposed abolishing many departments, repeatedly. Then again, i have a strange feeling that if Ron Paul was able to walk on water and turn water into wine, you will still find some reason to oppose him.
LOL!
I love it!
Ron Paul has many many good ideas and I think he really loves his country but he comes across like a kook and will go no higher in public office than he is now. (the proof being his run for the presidency)
Well until he no longer hangs around code pink and stormfront and has a sane foreign policy then I will support him.. Until then no way..
Kooky? In what way? Because he voted against this medal? If that is “kooky,” I’d hate to see an example of “sanity.” In fact, that true “kooks” were those politicians who dissed the constitution and voted (without a second thought) to hand out medals at 30K during an economic crisis. Now....that is “kooky” in a real, not imagainary, sense.
So Ron Paul “hangs around” stromfront. Please provide evidence for that very serious charge.....then again, if you don’t have facts, you can always make something up, right?
I understand his need for consistency but Paul needs to pick and choose his battles a little more carefully.
I understand his position but I don’t feel there is anything wrong with admiring if not awarding real American heroes.
People who are not golfers do not understand the impact of Arnold Palmer. Prior to him golf was primarily a rich man’s sport. Palmer was a common man, a man of the people. When he rose to prominence he changed the entire world of golf from one that was a sport of the priviliged to one that the average man could not only appreciate but absorb. With the advent of Palmer came a great municipal golf course building binge that made the game accessable to the middle and lower classes.
Arnold Palmer is not only a great success story but a truly
American success story built on the time honored American premise that all men are created equal...in this case before the foreboding and vengeful gods of fairways and greens. You’re title means nothing when confronted with that knee knocking 6 foot putt for birdie.
Arnold Palmer is the John Adams of American golf.
Very strange analogy. I don't get the point. There are multiple ways to save money for taxpayers and Paul has consistently stood up against such GOP/Democratic initiatives as the TARP. He is rated as one of the best by the National Taxpayers Union. He also is the lone voice against the Fed, which created this crisis.
Now by your snide remark, are you saying that if you were in Congress, you'd vote to hand out these medals? Please clarify.
Are you saying that you would urge him to vote for something he opposes just to “pick his battles?” Picking battles is one thing. Voting against your conscience is another. You seem to be confusing the two.
Davey Crockett did the same thing.
The point is (I thought it pretty clear) Paul and you are worried about pennies while the Government is dealing in trillions. And yes I would support giving medals to great Americans like Palmer and the likes of his achievements. If congressmen really want to help the taxpayers, stop all the fraud in the welfare and health systems that is costing us billions and billions every year. Let’s get with the big picture and keep an eye out for sure but don’t throw the baby out with the bath water on the small things. And get term limits and see if Congressmen (like Paul) would go on the same health systems and retirement systems like us instead of serving a couple years and sucking off us for the rest of their lives. Let Ron Paul be the first to reject his benefits and government gravy perks and be just like us little guys. Then he would get my vote.
Someone who argues his “conscience” against giving Arnold Palmer a simple medal to commemorate his contributions to American society should instead be buying property in Guyana for a holy Temple.
The problem with Paul is he has no sense of proportion. If one can’t rely on his sense of balance to husband resources for the truly important battles how can one be assured he is not wasting those resources on the absurd?
Do not confuse ideology or principle with politics, they are not the same animal and he who cannot differentiate between the two has no business being a leader of millions.
Just MO.
A simple medal? You must make some big money. To most of us, getting a 30K medal would be anything but "simple." In any case, it is clear that you are supportive of handing out these medals (there are countless numbers handed out)in a time or recession. Thanks for your honesty.
More seriously, being practical is entirely different thing than voting against your conscience. I can always vote my conscience and not make it into a time-consuming priority (which I don't see Paul doing). Practicality and priorities makes perfect sense but voting against your own beliefst is an entirely different thing. You are muddling the two.
A simple medal? You must make some big money. To most of us, getting a 30K medal would be anything but "simple." In any case, it is clear that you are supportive of handing out these medals (there are countless numbers handed out)in a time or recession. Thanks for your honesty.
More seriously, being practical is entirely different thing than voting against your conscience. I can always vote my conscience and not make it into a time-consuming priority (which I don't see Paul doing). Practicality and priorities makes perfect sense but voting against your own beliefst is an entirely different thing. You are muddling the two.
He refuses to accept the Congressional pension (much to the dismay of his wife), the only member of Congress to have the courage to do so. Then again, he hasn't yet walked on water so I doubt that he could qualify for your vote.
Kevin, code pink and stormfront types hang around him- not the other way around. Before you make a dumb statement in response, shall I post the pic of Sami al Arian hanging around George Bush?
Ping
Good responses all.
I think you need to be a golfer to embrace that one, even though I understand your point.
But then again, couldn't much the same be said for Arthur Ashe and tennis?
And then just how many sports are we supposed to go through as "rich man's sports, now open to the general public because of this person" before we're done?
If Rosa Parks didn't get one, even though Arnie may be a great guy, somehow I can't even begin to think of making an exception for him with public funds. If you want to honor him, do what Ron Paul did with Rosa Parks, pull out a hundred dollar bill -- YOUR hundred, not mine!
If you knew more about John Adams you wouldn't denigrate Arnie with that comparison.
Adams was irreplaceable in the Revolution but an awful President...the first liberal, who, after losing to Jefferson, packed the federal courts before his term ended. One of those appointments was Marbury of "Marbury v. Madison". Some strict-constructionists would argue that this was the most devastating blow to the future of the Republic...FDR advanced it, Obama may be the latest but liberty is now in the hands of nine people and their track record does not inspire confidence.
Jefferson was the French Revolution supporting, financier-hating leftist, no wonder what the Southrons say.
Good for Ron Paul! (And I say this as maybe the biggest Arnie fan in the country.)
Post #4 LOLOLOL
Paul raised more money in q4 07 than any other gop candidate, yet was given marginalizing and/or ridiculing coverage by the media, when he was given any at all. Agree or not (or both, on varying issues), the guy has a message which would have been much more popular if Pravda had not decided to approve and cover his message.
The GOP primary was media-run, media-approved, and the media candidate won.
“The point is (I thought it pretty clear) Paul and you are worried about pennies while the Government is dealing in trillions.”
I strongly suspect Paul did not ‘pick a battle’ here so much as the media picked a fight with him over his vote. I strongly doubt he did anything but oppose the entire looting of the treasury over the past year, and likely made so very clear every time he was able to speak on the floor.
If he has a history of opposing these gold medals, I see nothing of interest here.
Touche - that's gonna leave a mark.
Not original. He's copying Davey Crocket when Crocket was in congress. Google Not yours to give" for the story.
Still a gutsy move though.
He is right regarding medals. He is a loon regarding defense.
Hmmm, which is more important. Oh, I don’t know.....
Congress should not be wasting time on such trivia, regardless of how good a guy they are honoring.
100%.
He got a raw deal and the Republican Party made it happen, with an obliging MSM.
I like most, but not all, of his ideas.
Ron Paul is not wrong on defense. He is very much right in opposing Wilsonianism and the world nanny state. We can’t afford it and it ain’t working. Check out the situation in “democratic” Afghanistan and Pakistan if you need evidence.
“He got a raw deal and the Republican Party made it happen, with an obliging MSM.
I like most, but not all, of his ideas.”
A major area I disagreed with him was foreign policy, not philosophically as much as in terms of implementation. The US holds a huge amount of power and projected influence in the world, and withdrawing from that will simply create a vacuum that a much less humane country will occupy (read: russia and china).
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.