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 ...
Saddam would have had no compuction to using said weaponry on the USA.
How? did he have a missle capable of reaching the US?
Corrected typos:
Paul wore out his welcome when he cast that pandering anti-American vote with the rats last week. He may as well change parties. (And I'm sorry to say I actually voted for this guy in '88.)
Who's that from, Judith Miller?
The Bush administration paid the Iraqi National Congress $400K/month to tell them such poppycock.
Are you addressing this to me or OC? Your post is ambiguous. I'm not for Ron Paul at all and am taking OC to task for the links he provided being all leftist material.
You said "dominated by". After all, the US Congress has Ron Paul, but the Congress is not dominated by the likes of him.
Oh and you quote a 27-year old article to make what point, exactly? I'm not up on my Arabic, but my guess is that "Al Dawa" is a pretty common term. My research indicates it means "an invitation," although the underlying connotation is possibly different.
No, he didn't.
There was never a Vote on the Iraq WAR, because Congress abdicated its responsibility to Declare War.
Ron Paul advocated a Vote for an Iraq WAR.
Add me to your ping list for Ron Paul.
Atta didn't have such a missle either.
A head in the sand conservative.
"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"
becomes;
"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"
So it isn't dominated by "convicted" Islamic terrorists??
Cuba once had a dictator named Batista and he was a bad guy.
The guy who replaced him was Castro and he is even worse.
You want us to bail on Iraq and hand the keys to Iran. In that case I'm pretty sure they are not going to end up with a government LESS corrupt.
I see.
So your argument is that Jamal Jafaar Mohammed dominates the Iraqi government.
How so? I was unaware that a single MP holds power over the entire Iraqi government - when was that change in the Iraqi constitution made?
After all, his party received less than 4% of the vote - doesn't it usually take a majority to dominate a parliamentary government?
Atta didn't have such a missle either.
Yes, but that problem has been corrected, right?
If your heart bleeds so for foreigners, then by all means help them on your own dime. There are victims of thuggish regimes all over Africa, South America and Southeast Asia.
Where did Abu Nidal find sanctuary?
Check the Links I provided. Al Dawa and SCIRI, "Al Sistani's List", are the Ruling Majority Government of Iraq.
Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, of the Al Dawa Party, was the Al Dawa bureau chief in Damascus in the 1980s and was thus heavily responsible for Al Dawa operations in Beirut, while parliament member Jamal Jafaar Mohammed of his ruling coalition is one of the "Kuwait 17", still under a Kuwaiti death sentence (in absentia) for his direct involvement in the vicious attack on the US Embassy in Kuwait!
Oh and you quote a 27-year old article to make what point, exactly? I'm not up on my Arabic, but my guess is that "Al Dawa" is a pretty common term. My research indicates it means "an invitation," although the underlying connotation is possibly different.
Al Dawa means "The Islamic Call" and is the Islamic Terrorist progenitor of Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad... all sorts of wonderful folk.
Missle?! What a false premise.
Try the cargo hold of an oil tanker (particularly bothersome, since much oil had NORM, making a nuke hard to detect). Or a truck driving across the Mexican border.
Etc.
You know that.
Check the Links I provided. Al Dawa and SCIRI, "Al Sistani's List", are the Ruling Majority Government of Iraq.
Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, of the Al Dawa Party, was the Al Dawa bureau chief in Damascus in the 1980s and was thus heavily responsible for Al Dawa operations in Beirut, while parliament member Jamal Jafaar Mohammed of his ruling coalition is one of the "Kuwait 17", still under a Kuwaiti death sentence (in absentia) for his direct involvement in the vicious attack on the US Embassy in Kuwait!
You are a damn liar. He voted agaisnt the Iraq war resolution! We will not forget he would let Saddam remain in power, and we will not forget he sided with the donks to cut and run and not support opur troops when they are on the battlefield.
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.