[AuntB]

“If Ron Paul had been elected, we would still have some hope for our country.

What exactly is it going to take before people see the truth?”

Paul has always written well, and usually makes good points. The problem is Paul was a failure as a legislator. He never got one proposal through congress. Never.

[maclay]

I think that is the point. The less government does, the better. Add that to all the things they wanted to do that he was against, and you get someone who is working in our interest.

[Calvinist_Dark_Lord]

Paul has always written well, and usually makes good points. The problem is Paul was a failure as a legislator. He never got one proposal through congress. Never.

The point is AuntB, not that Congressman Paul couldn't get a piece of legislation through congress. The point is that the other 437 congress persons couldn't see what was right in front of their faces when they went against Ron Paul.

If the man makes, as you say, Good Points, why isn't the rest of the congress listening?

It is more an indictment of Congress and the federal government than it is a criticism of Ron Paul.

[FReepapalooza]

Funny I don’t see him as a failure at all, more like a beacon of faith.

The reason he never got anything through congress is a reflection of the other representatives that the people keep putting back in office, term after term.

He’s up against the enemy, can’t you see that?

[CautiouslyHopeful]

According to his Wikipedia page he has gotten a few pieces of legislation passed:

"He has written successful legislation to prevent eminent domain seizure of a church in New York, and a bill transferring ownership of the Lake Texana dam project from the federal government to Texas. By amending other legislation, he has barred funding for national identification numbers, funding for federal teacher certification, International Criminal Court jurisdiction over the U.S. military, American participation in any U.N. global tax, and surveillance on peaceful First Amendment activities by citizens."