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 ...
Nothing. But that's not how you come across. When one reads that post it's smarmy 'look at us, we Calvinists have the inside track' braggadocio. your whole thread has been in-your-face confrontation to anyone who doesn't bow and genuflect to your leader. It's a big turn off and you personally have turned off a lot of us on Ron Paul. I came into this with an open mind. I hadn't followed Paul's time in congress so was mostly unfamiliar with him. Until you came along, that is. Now, knowing how he voted with the Dems on the non-binding resolution, and seeing how his followers act, I'll pass, thank you. You blew it yourself and have no one else to blame.
Goodbye!
At the current pace you should have him withdrawing from the race by midnight and joining the Democrat Party (he already votes with them and would fit right in).
One could easily make the argument that you could be trying to ruin his campaign in a round-about way....if that's the case, it's working....but I don't think you could pull it off.....and that goes onto a really long list of other things I don't think you could pull off.
Good bye.
I'm pretty sure you will hide out and be hard to find after the primaries.
Your attitude turns off the very people he needs for support so just keep poking more holes in his boat and then come up with excuses when he sinks.
You're kinda' like the "One Note Samba" when it comes to posting....seen one of them and you've seen them all.
Best, OP
Now where is your list? Provide names other than the one you gave us. If the terrorist have so infiltrated the government of Iraq, there should be names that can be recogonized as such.
Nice try. Oh, and you can parse RP's vote with the Democrats any way you like, but was still treasonous.
I also posted the breakdown of the Iraqi parliment by organization..Post #261...the Al-Dawa party is not even among them.
Thanks for playing. NEXT!.
We attacked the terror regimes in both Afghanistan and Iraq but in Iraq it affected more than just Iraq, remember what happened with Libya the week Saddam was captured.
Read posts 80-85;
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1323498/posts?page=85#80
Iraq is just as much of the WOT as Afghanistan.
For those who think we should not have engaged the Iraq-Libya-Egypt-Iran-DPRK terror regime in Iraq what would you have done instead?
It seems to me Iraq was exactly the right place to crack the Iraq-Libya-Egypt-Iran-DPRK terrorism nut.
You're all against the Iraqi government having one terrorist in it and yet you support a country that has been run by terrorists for years.
Guess you think Mr. Arafat was the cat's pajamas.
Glad I found out where you're coming from. That anti-Israel post that you put on your page puts you right in there with Pat Buchanan and explains your ridiculous position on this.
No, it doesn't. But as a mathematician, I'm not impressed by Mediocre Doctors.
Tell Carol "hello" for me.
Ask her if she's tired of being with RINO surrender monkey who votes against the troops!
Are you impressed by mediocre sports team owners?
It doesn't matter. Such peoples' supporters don't run around throwing a worthless "Doctor" in my face, trying to assert that it is some sort of relevant credential.
Well, golly, my first post was #148. I was around lurking for quite awhile. I finally took him at his word and followed one of his links which was to a site providing links to all left wing blogs. Right there I knew there was an agenda. So I called him on it.
Beyond that I did have an open mind until I checked out that link. But I doubt he'd understand that. He's too full of himself by half, and too stuck on a dead-head candidate.
Oh, well.
"Glad I found out where you're coming from. That anti-Israel post that you put on your page puts you right in there with Pat Buchanan and explains your ridiculous position on this."
On your tip, went to his page.
Not only anti-Israel, but arguably anti-Roman Catholic.
Great guy!
"But as a mathematician, I'm not impressed by Mediocre Doctors."
Maybe it's because Howard Dean and Ron Paul are both medical doctors AND anti-troop morons?
You haven't pointed out anything except that you can dig up liberal propaganda and regurgitate it over and over even when it has been debunked.
Nah, it's because it costs an incredible sum of money for them to say, "We don't know what causes this. Get a blood test. Here's the same prescription I've been giving you for 3 years. See you in 2 months."
It should explain everything.
Become a victim. High on the list of liberal tactics.
Great guy!
Yeah. Like the part where he compares Calvin to Luther:" Calvin spoke to the learned at all times, even when preaching before multitudes. His manner is classical; he reasons on system; he has little humour; instead of striking with a cudgel he uses the weapons of a deadly logic and persuades by a teacher's authority, not by a demagogue's calling of names." If you read the paragraph before this, the demagogue he's referring to is Luther.
Then he has the temerity to tell me that as a Lutheran I'd be welcome under Ron Paul's big tent full of Calvinists.
I almost responded to that but thought better of it. He's too full of himself to understand how he insults people.
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.