Posted on 01/11/2007 6:06:07 PM PST by Rodney King
Texas Congressman Ron Paul files for GOP presidential bid
HOUSTON -- Ron Paul, the iconoclastic nine-term congressman from southeast Texas, took the first step Thursday toward launching a second presidential bid in 2008, this time as a Republican.
Paul filed incorporation papers in Texas on Thursday to create a presidential exploratory committee that allows him and his supporters to collect money on behalf of his bid. This will be Paul's second try for the White House; he was the Libertarian nominee for president in 1988.
Kent Snyder, the chairman of Paul's exploratory committee and a former staffer on Paul's Libertarian campaign, said the congressman knows he's a long shot.
"There's no question that it's an uphill battle, and that Dr. Paul is an underdog," Snyder said. "But we think it's well worth doing and we'll let the voters decide."
Paul, of Lake Jackson, acknowledges that the national GOP has never fully embraced him despite his nine terms in office under its banner. He gets little money from the GOP's large traditional donors, but benefits from individual conservative and Libertarian donors outside Texas. He bills himself as "The Taxpayers' Best Friend," and is routinely ranked either first or second in the House of Representatives by the National Taxpayers Union, a national group advocating low taxes and limited government.
He describes himself as a lifelong Libertarian running as a Republican.
Paul was not available for comment Thursday, Snyder said.
But he said the campaign will test its ability to attract financial and political support before deciding whether to launch a full-fledged campaign. Snyder said Paul is not running just to make a point or to try to ensure that his issues are addressed, but to win.
Paul is expected to formally announce his bid in the next week or two, Snyder said.
Snyder said Paul and his supporters are not intimidated by the presence of nationally known and better-financed candidates such as Sen. John McCain of Arizona or former Gov. Mitt Romney of Massachusetts.
"This is going to be a grassroots American campaign," he said. "For us, it's either going to happen at the grassroots level or it's not."
Paul limits his view of the role of the federal government to those duties laid out in the U.S. Constitution. As a result, he sometimes casts votes that appear at odds with his constituents and other Republicans. He was the only Republican congressman to vote against Department of Defense appropriations for fiscal year 2007.
The vote against the defense appropriations bill, he said, was because of his opposition to the war in Iraq, which he said was "not necessary for our actual security."
Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not b
That said, he is wrong on several issues--some already pointed out on this thread--but sadly he fails on the greatest one by which God will judge our nation: abortion.
Like Mitt Romney and John McCain, Ron Paul takes the Confederate position on abortion. He is against protecting unborn life at the federal level.
John McCain (June 19, 2005): "I believe that we would be better off by having Roe v. Wade returned to the states."
Ron Paul (April 30, 2001): "Our focus should be on overturning Roe and getting the federal government completely out of the business of regulating state matters. All abortion foes must understand that the real battle should be fought at the state level."
Where's our modern-day Lincoln?
I have never doubted our military men and women. It is the politicians and the American people here at home that concern me. With a soft American public the Democrats and some Republicans selling out our troops is indeed a possibility.
I have the upmost respect for him, but people like Pense and Hunter should stay in Congress. They could do a lot of work for good. What if he loses the national Election if he is the nominee????? Then what... He is out of power and we are screwed...
Yes, he made that statement early in his career. That was before he started pushing for tougher laws on drug crimes. It would seem that libertarian ideals and culture had changed somewhat between those times in his life.
Can you imagine what he would think of their desire to cut and run in the face of enemies who attacked this nation?
Nope. I don't know his motivation, just that he was one of the primary architects of Vietnam, then turned around and said we could never win it.
I happen to agree on that position, abortion should be left up to the states....
It will make Darfur look like a tea party.
He's lose, but we needn't cross that bridge yet. I seriously doubt he'll get the nonination.
In a case like that, When Johnny (and Joan) coming marching home...they'll be pi$$ed.
And do you feel the same about slavery? Should that be up to the states, as well?
Abortion will have to be a state's issie. The chance for a SCOTUS ruling died with the '06 election.
Ronald Reagan never backed down from a challenge he thought could be overcome, or appeased in the face of danger. Ron Paul is an appeaser. If appeasement is the "heart and sould of conservatism", I don't want to belong to that brand of conservatism.
Same here.. I just think he can do more good buy staying in the house...
Convention wisdom is that it cannot be a state issue until Roe is overturned.
A human life amendment is the only way life will be protected.
:o) If he has viable links (NOT) to his accusation - he needs to get them to William Pitt or Turbin Durbin immediately.
We have no choice. We fight on until we win. Surrender would be disaster. Not only for us and the Iraqis, but for the entire Middle East and for the world.
I'd drop leaflets giving the residents of certain neighborhoods in Baghdad 24 hours to get out of Dodge, then I'd level them. Burn out the Jihadists' hidey holes, then kill them as they flee.
I have a question, how will the Federal Government enforce the ban on abortion if a human life amendment is passed???
If we would have maintained an absolute monopoly on destruction after that statute fell down in Bagdad and killed those required to maintain that for six months, this thing would have been over. But, no, we are toooooo civilized to win a war...we must conclude it instead.
Ron Paul (April 30, 2001): "Our focus should be on overturning Roe and getting the federal government completely out of the business of regulating state matters. All abortion foes must understand that the real battle should be fought at the state level."
On this he is 100% correct. Roe v Wade should be overturned and the matter returned to the states where it would be MUCH simpler to get abortion treated as the murder it is. Remember, Ron Paul is/was an OB/GYN and a deliverer of babies. Hardly the stuff of an abortionist. So what's your problem with this statement???
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.