Skip to comments.Ron Paul, the Real Republican? (Announcing the Great Ron Paul Ping List)
Posted on 02/20/2007 8:59:49 AM PST by OrthodoxPresbyterian
Ron Paul, the Real Republican?
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
By Radley Balko
When you read about a vote in Congress that goes something like 412-1, odds are pretty good that the sole "nay" came from Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas. He so consistently votes against widely popular bills, in fact, that the Washington Post recently gave him the moniker "Congressman 'No.'"
Paul isn't a reflexive contrarian--he doesn't oppose just to oppose. Rather, he has a core set of principles that guide him. They happen to be the same principles envisioned by the framers of the U.S. Constitution: limited government, federalism, free trade and commerce -- with a premium on peace.
When most members of Congress see a bill for the first time, they immediately judge the bill on its merits, or if you're more cynical, they determine what the political interests that support them will think of it, or how it might benefit their constituents.
For Paul, the vast majority of bills don't get that far. He first asks, "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.
This hasn't won him many friends in Congress, or, for that matter, his own party. It hasn't won him influential committee assignments or powerful chairmanships, either. Those are generally handed out to the party animals who vote as they're told. An incorruptible man of principle in a corrupt body almost utterly devoid of principle, Paul is often a caucus of one.
Paul recently announced his intentions to run for president in 2008. For the few of us who still care about limited government, individual rights, and a sensible foreign policy, Paul's candidacy is terrific news....Continue reading
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Don't you see? Reniging on term limits is a bedrock libertarian principle.
Bedrock libertarian principles are, of course, whatever Ron Paul wants. They are like reeds in the wind. Like Mohammed's favorite wife once said to him, "It's amazing how God always tells you what you want to hear."
Now that Saddam Hussein is DEAD, do you believe that the Federal Government should spend hundreds of billions of dollars and thousands of American Lives to provide military and financial support to a Government dominated by convicted Islamic Terrorists who attacked our Embassies and murdered hundreds of United States Marines in cold blood?
Do you think Saddam should still be in power and alive? If Ron had his way, he would be. Ron is not deserving to lead this country. He is a coward and abandoned our troops on the battlefield.
Ron Paul wanted to hire pirates after 9/11 to respond to al-Qaida on our behalf.
I am embarrassed to admit that he's my congressman, and I'm looking forward to his retirement. I hope he resigns from congress in his futile quest for the Presidency.
And you would have us cut and run and allow the country to be taken over by those nice Iranians....and that is somehow better?
Your arguments, just like your candidate are going nowhere.
Yes, or No?
Nations do not have friends. They only have interests.
What I have proposed is a good imperial solution. But since the US is an anti-imperial institution, it is structurally incapable of doing what is necessary. Therefore, the best option at this point is for the troops to withdraw to Kuwait and Qatar and let the Shia and Sunnis sort things out for themselves.
The link you provided in your article, the one regarding Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and his link to the Iraqi Dawn party, is interesting in that it contains sidebar links to all kinds of leftist blogs. I didn't see one conservative blog I recognized.
This tells me something of your agenda. All I can say for those motivated to sign up for your ping list is "buyer beware".
Ron Paul... Surrender monkey.
"Iraqi Government is now a Government dominated by convicted Islamic Terrorists who attacked our Embassies and murdered hundreds of United States Marines in cold blood"
I've found one Iraqi MP that could be convicted so far;
Jamal Jafaar Mohammed
Who are the many that have been actually convicted?
Got any other tunes to play for us today or is that it?
Exactly. If cut-and-run Ron Paul is a "Real Republican", then I guess I'm not one.
"Continuing to provide Military and Financial support to an Iraqi Government which is dominated by Islamic Terrorists who attacked our Embassies and murdered hundreds of US Marines" is something which:
His word means nothing.
You are welcome to your opinion, I think you might be overstating the case just a little bit.
I don't really think this makes him specifically "corruptable."
Letters of marque and reprisal are a constitutionally prescribed response to attacks by non-state actors. They are also sound strategy, since the US military is just not structured for Fourth Generation warfare. In fact, the US government currently employs a private company, Blackwater Group, as mercenary combat units. These men make six figure salaries, and are thus quite motivated.
You have no idea of knowing that. No idea whatsoever. So, why not argue the vitures of Mr. Paul instead of attacking Reagan.
It's true, no matter who reports it.
You answer my question first I posed to you. Do you think Saddam should still be in power and alive? Answer it. If Ron had his way he would be.
It's because it is loaded with half-truths and is worded like it came from "DU"
Word twisting like that is very popular over there.