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 ...
Shiite Parties: United Iraqi Alliance, 130 seats.
Leading figures: Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari, Abbul-Aziz al-Hakim, of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq; Shiite Cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.
Kurdish Coalition, 53 seats.
Leading figures: President Jalal Talabani and Massoud Barzani.
Islamic Party of Kurdistan: 5.
Iraqi Accordance Front, 44 seats.
Leading figures: Tariq al-Hashimi, Adnan al-Dulaimi.
Iraqi Front for National Dialogue, 11 seats.
Leading figure: Saleh al-Mutlaq.
Iraqi National List, 25 seats.
Leading figure: former Prime Minister Ayad Allawi.
Reconciliation and Liberation Bloc, 3 seats.
Iraqi Nation List (Secular Sunni Arab), one seat.
Yazidi minority religious sect, one seat.
Al-Rafidian List (Christian), one seat.
Turkomen Iraqi Front (Turkish secular), one seat.
Provided as reference material.
So, are you leaving FR? Please say you are. Take ron Paul with you. Hey, please let Ron know that he's outta here...gonna get the stick next election cycle.
Okay, but Ron Paul does not support Open Borders. He is very Anti-Illegal-Immgration and Pro-Border-Security. Read my commentary on Immigration, posted below the Article.
Boy, I did not get that from your posts. Went back and reread it... still did not get that. Sorry for the mixup...
Ron Paul turned his back on the troops and he is political dead meat.
You are not telling the truth. He voted against the Iraq War Resolution, which gave the President the authority to use force against Saddam. Force was used and Saddam removed. If Ron had his way, Saddam would still be in power, period. It is on Congressional record.
What the Paul followers fail to see is that the terrorists are psycho-mass murderers, and will bomb the piss out of us if they perceive our will is lost. We can NEVER cut and run where Islamo-terrorists are involved.
I agree with your point entirely. I, myself, supported a Declaration of War and the removal of Saddam from power.
I did not then, and do not now, believe that we should maintain a continuing troop presence thereafter if the Iraqis are going to vote Terrorists into Power.
LOL. Yes, the US soldiers and scientists lied about the enriched uranium they removed.
The Bush allies at the NYT and BBC were in on it.
It's all a conspiracy by Halliburton and the Joooos.
No actually the GOP Congress has done just that for 10 years as much as the DEMs but nobody bothers to see why. Be back in later to defend what I posted but I can defend it.
Bump for Ron Paul.
(The only member of Congress I can respect)
Ron Paul is opposed to the Iraq War, so I can't support him.
The word "War" is not anywhere in the title of that Resolution. It it is not a Constitutional Congressional Declaration of War -- which Ron paul advocated.
"Why is it then that we are continually told that another terror attack is not a matter of "if" but is a matter of "when?""
Because the job is not done.
And cowardly nutjobs like Ron Paul who give aid and comfort to the terrorists and show weakness aren't helping get the job done.
Duncan Hunter is solid on a lot of those issues as well. And supports the Iraq War. Makes the choice between him and Paul pretty easy.
and will bomb the piss out of us if they perceive our will is lost.
As one who supports the WoT and the invasion of Iraq, I say yes to sending our troops without a declaration of war when the administration believes it is necessary to defend America. This is not the first time this has happened.
As for having our troops in Iraq creating a democracy, that's not their purpose as warriors. However, I've yet to see a better alternative. Will democracy in Iraq and Afghanistan emerge victorious? Perhaps. But it will never happen if we now cut and run. Nor may it happen if we stay yet fight a politically correct war. What America has to do is come to a decision; do we stay or leave? I'm for staying. But if we do, the gloves must come off and we must win. Anything short of that would be disastrous. Gen. W. T. Sherman and his march through Georgia to the sea comes to mind as an example. The same with Phil Sheridan's march through the Shenandoah.
Who said fight a ground war?
Massive attacks to destroy production facilities, and let it fall into chaos.
At most, help the Kurd in the North.
Sure, as soon as you let me know what a "nay" vote would have accomplished....., or for that matter, what any vote OR non-vote would have accomplished, except to throw red meat to the mindless.
If Ron had his way Saddam would still be in power to rape, torture and murder the innocent. Can't parse that.
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.