Free Republic
Browse · Search
RLC Liberty Caucus
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ron Paul Draws Passionate Support
National Catholic Register ^ | Jan. 22, 2008 - Feb. 2, 2008 issue | CHARLIE SPIERING

Posted on 01/23/2008 8:02:07 AM PST by murphE

National Catholic Register


News

Ron Paul Draws Passionate Support

BY CHARLIE SPIERING

REGISTER CORRESPONDENT

January 27- February 2, 2008 Issue | Posted 1/22/08 at 10:16 AM

 

WASHINGTON — Presidential candidate Ron Paul’s campaign continues to win a portion of the Republican vote in early primary states, signified by his second-place finish in Nevada Jan. 19.

Although many consider his campaign a long shot, Ron Paul has built up a significant amount of enthusiastic supporters and raised substantial funds.

He beat frontrunner Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., in Nevada and Rudy Giuliani and Fred Thompson in Michigan.

Numerous Catholics in America are among those that remain unsatisfied with the mainstream political candidates for president, and many have joined the vocal supporters of a campaign that is significantly different than his Republican rivals’.

Paul is a 10-term congressman representing Texas who has consistently held his strong political beliefs based on a strict interpretation of the Constitution.

Like many Republican presidential candidates, Paul is pro-life and has a congressional record to prove it. Supporters like to point out that he is an obstetrician who has delivered more than 4,000 babies and shares a personal conviction of pro-life issues.

“I, of course, never saw one time when a medically necessary abortion had to be done.” Paul stated during the CNN/YouTube debate last November.

Paul’s opposition to Roe vs. Wade stems from his strict interpretation of the Constitution. He believes the federal government should have no role in determining abortion rights.

Elizabeth Graham, director of Texas Right to Life, noted that as a Congressman, Paul took pro-life issues seriously, but noted that his approach was different.

“Ron Paul thinks that the federal government doesn’t belong in the abortion issue, so occasionally there is a vote that might appear anti life,” she said, “but it stems from his belief that it’s a states-rights issue rather than a federal government issue.”

In spite of his misgivings about the federal nature of the partial-birth abortion ban, heavily reliant on the Supreme Court’s decision, Paul voted for it.

“Despite its severe flaws, this bill nonetheless has the possibility of saving innocent human life, and I will vote in favor of it,” Paul stated on the floor of the House of Representatives. “I fear, though, that when the pro-life community uses the arguments of the opposing side to advance its agenda, it does more harm than good.”

In the same speech, Paul stated that, “Abortion on demand is no doubt the most serious sociopolitical problem of our age.”

Paul’s strategy to ban abortion is best revealed in a bill that he sponsored that would strip the federal courts of jurisdiction over abortion.

“By denying the federal courts’ jurisdiction, state laws banning abortion would stand and there would not be any Roe vs. Wade,” said Thomas Woods, Jr., a senior fellow at the Ludwig von Mises Institute. Woods wrote a letter to fellow Catholics supporting Ron Paul and making a case for his candidacy.
Anti-War and Anti-Death

Paul stands alone among the Republican presidential candidates as one who voted against the Iraq war, stating that it was unconstitutional, since it never received a congressional declaration of war. If elected president, Paul promises to withdraw troops from Iraq.

Thomas Peters, who runs the blog American Papist, contributes to a blog called Catholics for Ron Paul. He noted that since the Vatican hasn’t spoken magisterially about the Iraq war, Catholics can continue to debate the issue. “He [Paul] has philosophical and rational reasons for why he thinks that American involvement isn’t the best choice,” said Peters. “He examines the question using principles of just war theory, specifically speaking about the Christian tradition of a just war,” he added.

Paul mentioned the Vatican’s comments regarding the Iraq War when paying tribute to John Paul II’s legacy. “The Pope’s commitment to human dignity, grounded in the teachings of Christ, led him to become one of the most eloquent spokesmen for the consistent ethic of life, exemplified by his struggles against abortion, war, euthanasia and the death penalty,” he said on the floor of the House of Representatives on April 6, 2005, four days after the Pope’s death.

Although initially a supporter of the death penalty, Paul changed his position after studying the issue throughout his political career.

Some religious voters remain skeptical about a vote for Paul, as his strict interpretation for the Constitution pits him against federal legislation to ban prostitution, drugs and homosexual “marriage.”

Peters said, “Ron Paul voted against the marriage amendment, but only because he thought it was non-constitutional, not because he doesn’t think marriage isn’t a union of a man and a woman.”

“We cannot go to Washington to dictate to us how we improve our personal behavior,” said Paul, explaining his position at the 2007 Value Voters Summit in Washington D.C. “You don’t dictate; you don’t legislate virtue. In a free society, you do that from people, from your family, your friends, and your neighbors, but not in the federal government.”

Paul’s platform has drawn the support of several controversial groups, including those advocating legalization of prostitution, drugs and even advocates of race supremacy.

Woods said that he supports Paul because of his steadfast, long-held political views that ring true with the Constitution.

“The fact that Ron Paul is a man of integrity, who can’t be bought, and preaches his views thick or thin, good times or bad, fair or foul weather, appeals to Catholics who believe that there are unchanging truths,” he said. “It’s very rare to see politicians who stand by their guns in all circumstances, and this guy does it.”


Charlie Spiering is based in

Washington, D.C.


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: catholic; catholiclist; prolife; ronpaul
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-39 last
To: pseudo-ignatius

If Fred is not listed on the ballot, then I probably vote for Ron Paul. (Yes, I know Fred dropped out but his name may still be on the ballot.)


21 posted on 01/24/2008 7:38:29 AM PST by Pfesser (Georgia is for Law and Order Fred)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: murphE

“Ron Paul Draws Passionate Support”

As does David Duke.

Neither shall ever be president of these United States.

Ever.


22 posted on 01/24/2008 4:11:08 PM PST by NoLibZone (If the Clinton years were so great, why is Osama doing so well?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: murphE; 2ndMostConservativeBrdMember; afraidfortherepublic; Alas; al_c; american colleen; ...

.


23 posted on 01/24/2008 8:28:19 PM PST by Coleus (Abortion and Euthanasia, Don't Democrats just kill ya?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: murphE

After the Paul newsletter disclosures, one would think that the Paultards would hang their head in shame and slink away. Instead they defend the wakadoo and the ugly subculture of the ultra far right. Bizarro.


24 posted on 01/24/2008 8:30:27 PM PST 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: Coleus
Thank-you Coleus. You are the only Catholic ping list holder that responded to my request. You are a good egg.
25 posted on 01/24/2008 8:30:56 PM PST by murphE (These are days when the Christian is expected to praise every creed but his own. --G.K. Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Drango
Nope. Ron Paul is no racist. Any serious look at his life, his actions, his speech, and voting record shows it. But I'm sure the smear campaign will try to come up with something else.

"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." Gandhi

26 posted on 01/24/2008 8:36:24 PM PST by murphE (These are days when the Christian is expected to praise every creed but his own. --G.K. Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: murphE

sure thing, i’ve run into freepers who think a ping is an endorsement, some actually went into hysterical rants, it’s just a ping for their fyi or to discern.


27 posted on 01/24/2008 9:41:54 PM PST by Coleus (Abortion and Euthanasia, Don't Democrats just kill ya?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: murphE

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1958269/posts?page=24#24


28 posted on 01/24/2008 9:46:14 PM PST by Coleus (Abortion and Euthanasia, Don't Democrats just kill ya?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: murphE

Ron Paul is a nice man, but it’s too bad he doesn’t undersand Jihad.

He blames the U.S.A. for intervention for Jihad terrorism, but yet Jihad has been going on for centuries before the U.S. was even born.


29 posted on 01/24/2008 10:30:55 PM PST by Sun (Duncan Hunter: pro-God/life/borders, understands Red China threat, NRA A+rating! www.gohunter08.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sun

I’m Catholic and voting for RP, too.

And, while I’ve been a member here since 1998, I have not posted since fall of 2006, much less donated here again, with the neo-con shoutdowns and censoring.

So, here’s a lengthy posting to make up for all that lost time, if any still reading...

I know Ron Paul better than most, as I’ve been supporting and voting for him for close to a decade down here in Texas, as he’s been my Congressman, or was until the last re-districting mapped me out of his district.

Most all politicians are liars, telling you whatever you want to hear and bribing you with promises to get your vote, but once in a while there comes along a Statesman. A person with integrity and principles. Occasionally seen on the local level, though very rarely arriving and surviving on the national level.

How does anyone know with confidence who somebody really is and stands for and believes and would do when elected compared to what they say during the election?

What you do is look/see closely at what they’ve done in the past, what their track-record is, not just what they’ve recently said, but actually done. The longer the track-record the better and clearer the picture of where they’d really be heading next.

If you do so regarding Ron Paul, you’ll see why he has the nickname of “Dr. No”, for his consistent 20 years of voting against anything Un-Constitutional, voting against big government and higher taxes, voting against expanding police state powers and erosions of our freedoms and liberty, over and over again. For ten consecutive years he was awarded, out of all Congress members, the ‘Taxpayers’ Best Friend’ for these consistent efforts.

Other candidates have a real disconnect between what they say today and have done yesterday, if you look. And, that says a lot about their integrity and principles, too, or rather lack thereof.

You can also come to know any candidate by who their supporters are. In Ron Pauls’ case it has been uncontested that he has the most active duty military and veteran donors of any campaign. In fact, it’s his single largest group! Individual Americans, and lots of them, breaking all-time historic donation records, not PAC’s, bundlers, industrialists, lawyers, unions, and all manor of special interests that crowd the tops of other candidates donor lists. Look and you’ll see for yourself.

You can also come to know any candidate by who their enemies are, and here everybody in the establishment status quo govt, political parties, special interests, banking, and media, that has had a hand in ruining this country, empowering and enriching themselves, while eroding our wealth and freedoms, is and has been blatantly tripping all over themselves to silence Ron Paul.

Not just now, but for years this has been going on. He’s been one of the all time least popular and marginalized Congressmen on the hill, for so often voting Constitutionally and against his party and/or being the lone dissenter when all of Congress has embraced some feel-good or politically expedient resolution that was not Constitutional. He did not get the ‘Taxpayers’ Best Friend’ award for voting the party line, but for voting his conscience to always uphold his oath of office to support and defend the Constitution. Shame on Congress that it has been such a lonely stand.

Ron Paul is all about re-instating the Constitution in practice, not just campaign rhetoric, and he should be ranked amongst the hero’s of our Founding Fathers for his decades long lonely stand against most all that we have hated seeing going on in this country all these many years. If he’s not ignored, he’s vilified, marginalized and ridiculed. And, has been for years in staying the course for what is Constitutional while fearlessly rejecting whatever was not.

Most fair people that are not Ron Paul supporters, IMO, have been influenced or prejudiced by the media that he is not worth looking closer at, so they never have.

It’s also why many who most need to be reading this are not, because they won’t bother to waste their time, as the media bias has already made up their mind for them.

Even if you don’t support Paul, yet, you’ve got to admit that the fairness of the media and establishment GOP is horrendously biased against Ron Paul ever getting a fair airing of his positions, as seen here...

http://youtube.com/watch?v=5jZTd9j6_yg

And, consider, where would RP be ranked today if his positions had a fair airing, or at least as much media coverage as Rudy has enjoyed, whom Ron Paul has beaten 4 out of 5 times! Remember that every time you see Rudy mentioned on the air, but not a hint of Ron Paul or his sound proposals.

That’s what stings, that we might never get to see if enough Americans would have come together supporting Ron Paul this election if they had, and that is a real shame for all America.

What are they so afraid of you finding out, of possibly even have catch on nationally?

But, don’t take my word for any of this, go find out for yourself.

If he truly is who I say he is, you’d certainly be glad you did, for yourself, your children, your country, wouldn’t you?

Go look/see at his record and stands for yourself at...
www.ronpaul2008.com
...and...
www.ronpaullibrary.org/

Also, go look/see at his grassroots supporters here, too...
www.ronpaulforums.com

If you do, you’ll discover that Ron Paul and his campaign are alone calling for a return to the Constitution and limited government.

All the other candidates would maintain the current status quo and growing leviathan govt with all of us in the bus being driven right off and over the cliff’s edge. Their weight on the gas pedal might vary, but their track towards inevitable destruction surely would not.

I’ve been pleasantly surprised, considering the hugely powerful and entrenched vested interests he is threatening to dismantle, that we are doing as well as we are with this rare historic opportunity to undermine TPTB via this campaign to regain our Constitutional based limited govt and freedoms.

I was, admittedly, skeptical early on that there were enough un-apathetic American patriots left. Many, though, who had long ago opted out in disgust of the system, are jumping back in seeing the Ron Paul campaign as a last ditch attempt to wrestle back our country from the brink of destruction. The grassroots effort is truly and historically, record-breaking, amazing in their resolve and sacrifice to save their country.

For me, I’ll be vigorously supporting Ron Paul getting his message out far & wide for as long as his star burns brightly illuminating the masses to the loss of their Constitutional freedoms and liberties.

Win or lose, we are winning converts every day that are being inoculated by the Good Doctor for-life to never again settle for anything less.

When it comes time to take this country back, whether he had won or not, we’ll have thousands more fellow patriots standing shoulder-to-shoulder with us then because of him and this historic campaign having awakened them.

I hope/pray we can do so in-time, via the ballet box... before it’s gone.

- Shane

PS - It’s been personally enlightening for me these past months supporting Ron Paul in this Presidential bid. As one who would normally prefer to associate with people most like myself already, like most of us naturally do, I’ve found myself also rubbing elbows on occasion with fellow RP supporters that I’d consider pretty opposite of what I believe in spiritually and/or embracing lifestyles I don’t condone. There’s some of them, too, that just plain don’t look, act, talk, or live anything like I do.

This was all a little disconcerting at first, to say the least, and required some introspection and then growth on my part, as I asked myself whether some of these people are whom I really want to be associated, so opposite a few of them appeared to me and my values.

Except for that one big value that brought us together in the first place and unites us all, that one value that assures all our freedoms to be different from each other, we were all in agreement on preserving the Constitution, and that, for me anyways, eventually trumped any & all of the other usual personal differences.

My conception of freedom and liberty has since been expanded to enthusiastically include that they, too, of course, have the same right to pursue happiness as they see fit, too. I don’t have to agree with how they use their freedom, and I will argue with some of them about their bad personal life choices if given half a chance, but I do now recognize more today than ever that it is their choice and that that is what we can all work together to preserve and regain, each our own freedom to live as we each see fit with minimal govt interference.

Anyways, bottom line, really and substantially having America again embrace the Constitution via this campaign might first require many of us expanding and growing internally first our conception of what freedom and liberty for all really means in practice before we can all come together effectively. I know I’ve had to and my appreciation now of our interrelated reliance upon securing each others freedom has transcended any abstract theory of it and I’m better for it!

Where in years past I’d of been first attracted to the Evangelical leader in the race, all else being equal, now though, after more than a few disappointments, here’s what I consider most important in a President to best secure both my personal religious freedom along with assuring an environment that’s least restrictive for all religious persuasions:

#1 - In exercising his oath of office duties as President, I want a President that is foremost focused and dedicated to supporting, defending, and upholding the Constitution.

#2 - If he does #1, then my religious freedom to worship as I see fit without interference will be most assured and protected and prone to flourish, regardless of the Presidents own religious beliefs, or lack thereof.

#3 - A candidates religious beliefs and practices are of interest to me only to the degree that they might help illuminate or reveal his character and integrity to be, and remain, steadfastly committed to embrace #1 above, if elected.

Make sense?

Is America ready to fully embrace again the Constitution?

We’ll see soon enough and enjoy or suffer the consequences for generations to come!

If you don’t vote, you don’t count, and your children could suffer greatly for it while you stood by! Shame on you!

If you do vote, but had failed to become fully informed about the candidates, your vote then is at risk of actually having helped darken their futures, too.

Make sense?

- Shane


30 posted on 01/24/2008 11:35:49 PM PST by shanec
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: murphE
In spite of his misgivings about the federal nature of the partial-birth abortion ban, heavily reliant on the Supreme Court’s decision, Paul voted for it.

“Despite its severe flaws, this bill nonetheless has the possibility of saving innocent human life, and I will vote in favor of it,” Paul stated on the floor of the House of Representatives. “I fear, though, that when the pro-life community uses the arguments of the opposing side to advance its agenda, it does more harm than good.”


Actually, the "federal nature" of the Partial Birth Abortion Ban was heavily reliant not on Roe vs Wade, but on Wickard vs Filburn

Here is more from Ron Paul's speech on the PBA ban vote:

Another problem with this bill is its citation of the interstate commerce clause as a justification for a federal law banning partial-birth abortion. This greatly stretches the definition of interstate commerce.

It's all fine and dandy stretching the commerce clause to cover partial birth abortions or homegrown cannabis plants for personal consumption, but you do lose the right to complain when the other side stretches it to cover homegrown machine guns for personal consumption.

It is sad that the Free Republic forum has banished thoughts like those to the sidelines because of a disagreement about nation building.
31 posted on 01/25/2008 12:59:13 AM PST by publiusF27
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus
Please take me off this ping list..I loath Ron Paul. That man needs to be medicated.
32 posted on 01/25/2008 4:51:05 AM PST by zoomie81 ( God Bless Our Military)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: shanec

I want to put some illumination on the Paul supporters who represent a fanatical libertarian point of view with morals and beliefs also at odds with mine. A Paul presidency would be a big disappointment for them.

I can see a Paul presidency withdrawing support for the federal war on drugs for example, but I also see Paul letting the 10th Amendment operate for the states and localities which means they would be free to pursue the war on drugs as each sees fit, without federal mandates that effectively shackle them. Same for porn, prostitution, abortion and so on.

In effect, these neo-libertarians make themselves unwitting useful idiots which would probably find aid and comfort once again only in liberal northeastern States and California, and maybe Oregon, Nevada and Washington state.

Not perfect maybe, but it would be an improvement (my apologies to conservatives stranded in those states). I just think a Paul presidency would be a huge buzz kill for these people after about six months of real federalism recovered.


33 posted on 01/25/2008 5:02:38 AM PST by CatholicEagle (Byzantine Catholicism: The original traditional Catholicism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: murphE

I expect to be voting for Ron Paul.

bttt


34 posted on 01/25/2008 6:53:28 AM PST by Romulus ("Ira enim viri iustitiam Dei non operatur")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shanec; CJ Wolf; Extremely Extreme Extremist
Excellent post.


35 posted on 01/25/2008 9:04:23 AM PST by murphE (These are days when the Christian is expected to praise every creed but his own. --G.K. Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Romulus
I expect to be voting for Ron Paul.

= D So is Thomas Woods, great Catholic author, lecturer and history professor. He wrote a "An Open Letter to the Catholic Community", which does a superb job of stating why he is the best candidate choice for Catholics. I'd link to it, but the mods delete it when I do so anyone interested will have to google it.

36 posted on 01/25/2008 9:14:34 AM PST by murphE (These are days when the Christian is expected to praise every creed but his own. --G.K. Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: murphE
Babies who are slaughtered in utero are just as dead whether through Hillary's enthusiasm or through Dr. Demento's sheer laziness and indifference and "constitutional" posing. This is not the first time that Tom Woods is wrong and it won't be the last.

How do the SSPX excommunicated schismatics feel? Probably paleoPaulnuts each and every one.

Since the treasonous weasel and Al Qaeda plaything El Run Paulie hasn't a ghost's chance in hell of being nominated and is already 72 years old with a public image of uynrestrained lunacy, no one need worry about him having a political future anyhow.

37 posted on 01/25/2008 4:59:04 PM PST by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline of the Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

38 posted on 01/26/2008 12:19:48 PM PST by murphE (These are days when the Christian is expected to praise every creed but his own. --G.K. Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: murphE

Charles Manson’s followers were very enthusiastic too!!!


39 posted on 01/28/2008 4:50:32 PM PST by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline of the Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-39 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
RLC Liberty Caucus
Topics · Post Article

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