Ron Paul, his wife, his children, his grandchildren and his great-grandson have this nice Xmas greeting to offer. It's very sweet, probably cost less than $10 to make it. They even sing pretty well. Tucker had it on yesterday.
Posted on 12/20/2007 12:57:20 PM PST by neverdem
My thoughts exactly. Which is why I like Hunter so much. ;-)
I’m not happy with the ways things are, and I’m not overly thrilled with any of the Republican candidates. I might support Paul but I think he’s dead wrong about Iraq. So that’s a deal breaker.
I also don’t think a president who vetoes bills, only to have the vetoes routinely overriden by Congress is the answer to domestic problems either. Like it or not, the president has to work within the system as he finds it. Otherwise, there won’t be meaningful change.
I understand.
Some of us have been trying to get Constitutional Congressmen for quite a number of years, too, but since we have not been entirely successful, we find ourselves with less than ideal representatives in Congress.
You're right, we need both in order to make real progress, but we now have an opportunity to sieze the Bully Pulpit, which is worth a lot in terms of public opinion and public pressure being put on Congress.
Ordinarily, I would not advocate placing much trust in any particular political candidate, but sometimes a candidate comes along who I can get behind.
As to your objection to Ron Paul's position on the Iraq war, would you be so kind as to explain just exactly why you object?
Please, no hysterics or name-calling, as we have heard all that before.
Merry Christmas and have a Happy New Years.
LOL!
If we would stop the illegal immigration and send a lot of the present illegals back, then, within a generation or two, we would be an English speaking country again.
To hell with Reaganism, Washington is an affront to true Constitutional governance and probably has been since about 1861, definitely since 1933. Saint Ron himself was not able to turn the tide -- remember closing the Dept. of Education?? I am as much a fan of Ronald Reagan and what he stood for as anyone on this forum but we must face the fact that it would require a miracle of Lazarus proportions to properly restore Constitutional government (and Ron Paul definitely does not have that power or talent).
From my curmudgeonly perspective, the US is in the proverbial handbasket and it is getting mighty toasty as we skip merrily down the primrose path, IMO.
You haven’t heard hysterics or name-calling from me. Here’s my position.
Like it or not, we’re in Iraq. No one consulted me about going there, but since we are, I don’t want us to leave as we left Vietnam.
We’re making great progress there, and it’s being made at the local level. It seems to me that’s a validation of the argument that people shouldn’t expect a government (even an Iraqi one) to solve their problems. Regardless, while progress is being made, it doesn’t seem the time to pull out.
Paul doesn’t recognize the consequences of failure in Iraq. But he’s consistent. Neither does he recognize the consequences of our pull-out in Vietnam. He says Vietnam is now a trading partner as if there was no Cold War—of which Vietnam was a part.
Paul also doesn’t recognize the value of a free South Korea, or of that war’s place as part of the Cold War.
In brief, Paul denies the historical reality of the worldwide battle against Communism just, in my view, he denies the present global struggle with Islamofascism.
I don’t believe that Islamofascists will be satisfied with our pull-out of the Middle East and an apology. Those people are still pissed off about what happened more than a thousand years ago. How will withdrawal today make them forgive and forget?
We may disagree about that, but that is my belief and that’s why I can’t support Paul.
The sad irony is that rigid dogmatists such as Ron Paul are simply unwilling to acknowledge and face up to that reality. If Paul were somehow to be elected President through his "no compromise on principles" approach he'd soon discover that he could either compromise, or he would get nothing.
Even worse, not only does he have a supernova-level blind spot when it comes to perceiving and assessing genuine external threats to the nation, he has an equally blinding ignorance (or perhaps a naive over-confidence in his own ability) of the very real and deadly, yet unofficial, behind-the-scenes limitations on the power of the Presidency.
Even if Ron Paul were elected, his dogmatic rigidity would be his undoing. He has neither the understanding nor the ability to "prioritize" his principles, to wisely pick his battles and to compromise when necessary which was so masterfully demonstrated by Ronald Reagan. And, he absolutely lacks Reagan's charisma, communications skills and the ability to go over the heads of the elites and reach and mobilize the American people directly.
If elected, Ron Paul would stand a good chance of being the first President successfully impeached and removed from office.
Libertarian ping! To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here.
I’m a fan of Derb, but I’ll never support Paul.
Isolation, Surrender, Blame America, kooky supporters! Why I would NEVER support Ron Paul
You and I are not so far apart here.
IMO, things could change between now and the election.
Anyway, according to what I understood as the original scope of the mission, we have already won.
Derbyshire has been pretty good on immigration. He should take a look at Paul’s record. Paul voted for amnesty.
Ron Paul’s Immigration Record http://NumberUSA
Published: Oct 29, 2007
Paul’s Immigration Voting Record & Report Card on the NumbersUSA website:
(1) Paul consistently voted every year since 1999 against putting the military on the border:
2006: H. Amdt. 206 to H.R. 1815 2004: Goode Amendment to H.R. 4200 2003: Goode Amendment to H.R. 1588 2002: H. Amdt. 479 to H.R. 4546 2001: Traficant amendment to HR 2586 2000: Traficant amendment to H.R.4205 1999: Trafficant Amendment to H.R. 1401.
(2) Paul voted in 1997, 2001( H.R. 1885) and 2002 (H RES 365) to grant, extend or continue Section 245-i amnesties for illegal aliens.
(3) Paul voted NO on extending the voluntary Basic Pilot Workplace Verification Program (H.R. 2359),
(4) Paul voted NO on the border fence in 2005 (Hunter Amendment to HR 4437 - “Enforcement Only” Bill).
(5) Paul voted YES to increase H2-B (HR 763 in 2005) and H-1B visas (HR 3736 in 1998). In 1998, he voted to allow US firms to lay off Americans to replace them with foreigners.
http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=204917&Disp=101#C101
(2) Paul voted in 1997, 2001( H.R. 1885) and 2002 (H RES 365) to grant, extend or continue Section 245-i amnesties for illegal aliens.
Everyone needs a reminder of some of Pauls BAD immigration votes.
Especially Item #2. This was an amnesty and allowed for chain migration, more visas, blah,blah, and one reason it has gotten as bad as it has. It was pushed by the White House.
H.R.3525 Title: To enhance the border security of the United States, and for other purposes. (introduced 12/19/2001) Related Bills: H.RES.365, H.R.1885, H.R.3205, S.CON.RES.106, S.1618, S.1749 Latest Major Action: Became Public Law No: 107-173 [GPO: Text, PDF] Note: On 3/12/2002, H.Res. 365 was agreed to by the House. H.Res. 365 incorporated the text of H.R. 3525, the Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act, in H.R. 1885, previously the Section 245(i) Extension Act dealing with certain immigration petition filing deadlines. Subsequent action on border security returned to H.R. 3525.
http://www.congress.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d107:HR03525:
The White House [snip]
H.R. 1885 - Section 245(i) Extension Act The Administration strongly supports House passage of H.R.1885 as expected to be considered on the House floor. H.R. 1885 would extend the window created under section 245(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act during which qualified immigrants may obtain legal residence in the United States without being forced to first leave the country and their families for as long as several years. This legislation reflects the Administration’s philosophy that government policies should recognize the importance of families and help to strengthen them.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/legislative/sap/107-2/HR1885-h.html
also:
Rep. Paul is a cosponsor of H.R. 793, the Save Our Small and Seasonal Business Act of 2005, to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to limit the timing of issuance of H-2B visas during a fiscal year. Specifically, H.R. 793 would split the H-2B visa cap so no more than 33,000 visas are made available for the first six months the fiscal year, and another 33,000 visas would be available in the second half of the year. However, H.R. 793 exempts from the annual cap aliens granted an H-2B visa within three years prior to approval of an H-2B petition, thus potentially TRIPLING the number of H-2B workers in the United States at any one time. Although timing the issuance of H-2B visas is a common-sense approach that would help prevent the situation that occurred in FY 2004 and FY 2005 when the 66,000 annual cap on H-2B (low-skill) nonimmigrant visas was hit within the first quarter of the year, H.R. 793 would ultimately harm American workers by creating exemptions which potentially could triple the number of H-2B workers in the U.S. at any given time. Nearly doubled H-1B foreign high-tech workers in 1998
and
Voted on House floor against Hunter amendment to increase security with border fence in 2005 Rep. Paul voted against the Hunter Amendment to H.R. 4437, the Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005. The Hunter Amendment would shore up security by building fences and other physical infrastructure to keep out illegal aliens. Specifically, it mandates the construction of specific security fencing, including lights and cameras, along the Southwest border for the purposes of gaining operational control of the border. As well, it includes a requirement for the Secretary of Homeland Security to conduct a study on the use of physical barriers along the Northern border. The Hunter Amendment passed by a vote of 260-159
“No, we think “too much government” is the source of most of our problems. Ron Paul is the only candidate, on either side, that will reduce the size of government.”
Respectfully, that is an illusion. Paul’s record shows quite the opposite.
Here’s where the Paul small government argument breaks down.
It’s true Paul has never gotten a piece of his legislation into law. It may even be true that he is consistent in voting.
But in a ten year period Ron CO SPONSORED 1876 bills written by other people. That’s 1000 more than Duncan Hunter. Now if you believe those 1876 bills were all to decrease government (remember written by others who Paul supporters say NEVER lower government!) You’ll believe anything.
Ron Paul has proved he can’t ‘govern’. He has a zero record of accomplishments, except for pushing 1876 bills others wrote through congress. Small government guy?
Just for comparison of actual accomplishments in congress:
Sponsored means he wrote or introduced the bill. Co sponsors sign on to other bills written by someone else.
Statistics: Duncan Hunter has sponsored 105 bills since Jan 7, 1997, of which 72 haven’t made it out of committee (Average)
and 10 were successfully enacted (Good, relative to peers).
Hunter has co-sponsored 894 bills during the same time period (Average, relative to peers).
Now take a look at Ron Paul, who claims many ‘accomplishments’ and would never vote for any frivolous, unconstitutional bill!
Statistics: Ronald Paul has sponsored 346 bills since Jan 7, 1997, of which 341 haven’t made it out of committee (Extremely Poor) and 0 were successfully enacted .(Average, relative to peers).
Paul has co-sponsored 1876 bills during the same time period (Average, relative to peers) NOTE: 1876 bills, written by other congress members. All ‘constitutional’ ? You decide.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/person.xpd?id=400191
One of the stranger pieces of legislation that Paul Co sponsored would have kept him out of the debates!!
. H.CON.RES.263 : Expressing the sense of Congress that any Presidential candidate should be permitted to participate in debates among candidates if at least 5 percent of respondents in national public opinion polls of all eligible voters support the candidate’s election for President or if a majority of respondents in such polls support the candidate’s participation in such debates. Sponsor: Rep Jackson, Jesse L., Jr. [IL-2] (introduced 11/6/2001) Cosponsors (2)
See some of Paul’s CO sponsored legislation here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-rlc/1940847/posts?page=28#28
Take note of the ultra liberal socialists in congress he signed on with.
No legislation is better than bad legislation.
*****But in a ten year period Ron CO SPONSORED 1876 bills written by other people. That’s 1000 more than Duncan Hunter. Now if you believe those 1876 bills were all to decrease government (remember written by others who Paul supporters say NEVER lower government!) You’ll believe anything.*****
As I recall from earlier, few of those bills passed.
****and 10 were successfully enacted (Good, relative to peers).****
He was a committee chairman when Republs held congress. It is likely that he would get some bills through.
****Statistics: Ronald Paul has sponsored 346 bills since Jan 7, 1997, of which 341 haven’t made it out of committee (Extremely Poor) and 0 were successfully enacted .(Average, relative to peers).****
Here are a few bills Ron Paul has introduced.
Introduced
Dec 13, 2007
H.R. 4684: To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to waive the employee portion of Social Security taxes imposed on individuals who have been diagnosed as having cancer or a terminal disease.****
The tax and spenders need a dying man’s money.
Introduced
Dec 5, 2007
H.R. 4293: To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow an above-the-line deduction for State and local, and foreign, real property taxes.****
Less taxes, no chance.
Introduced
Nov 8, 2007
H.R. 4127: Make No Cents Until It Makes Sense Act****
There are zillions of pennies available. I have 3 coffee cans filled with them myself. And it probably costs more to make a penny than what it is worth. Just trying save the government a little money
Introduced
Nov 5, 2007
H.R. 4078: Education Professional Development Tax Credit Act of 2007*****
Tax Credit!!! Less taxes, no chance.
Introduced
Nov 5, 2007
H.R. 4077: To authorize the interstate traffic of unpasteurized milk and milk products in final package form for human consumption when the milk or milk product originates in a State that allows the sale of unpasteurized milk and milk products in final package form and is destined for another State that allows the sale of unpasteurized milk and milk products in final package form.*****
The nanny state must look after us.
Introduced
Oct 15, 2007
H.R. 3835: To restore the Constitution’s checks and balances and protections against government abuses as envisioned by the Founding Fathers.******
Now what other member of congress would want to restore the checks and balances???
Introduced
Sep 25, 2007
H.R. 3664: Tax Free Tips Act of 2007****
Tax cut, no chance.
Sep 19, 2007
H.R. 3601: Cost of Government Awareness Act of 2007****
Better to keep the citizens in the dark, no chance.
Do you think a majority of our congress critters would vote for any of those bills?
******One of the stranger pieces of legislation that Paul Co sponsored would have kept him out of the debates!!
. H.CON.RES.263 : Expressing the sense of Congress that any Presidential candidate should be permitted to participate in debates among candidates if at least 5 percent of respondents in national public opinion polls of all eligible voters support the candidate’s election for President or if a majority of respondents in such polls support the candidate’s participation in such debates. Sponsor: Rep Jackson, Jesse L., Jr. [IL-2] (introduced 11/6/2001) Cosponsors (2)*****
Well, I read this act a bit different than you do. It was to encourage more participation in the debates. I seem to recall that Perot was kept out of the debates in 96, although he was over 5% in the polls. That might have happened in 2001 too, to somebody.
Actually, Dr. Paul is telling us he is NOT the solution to our problems... WE hold our OWN solutions. Getting government, particularly FedGov, OUT OF THE WAY so we can implement our own solutions is what Dr. Paul is all about. You know, kinda like the Founders did all those years ago...
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.