Rep. Ron Paul wins seat early: Not 1 challenger filed to run against Texas' 'Mr. Constitution'

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | Wednesday, January 21, 2004

[JohnHuang2]

ELECTION 2004
Rep. Ron Paul wins seat early
Not 1 challenger filed to run against Texas' 'Mr. Constitution'

---

Posted: January 21, 2004
1:00 a.m. Eastern

© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com

Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas – known as "Mr. Constitution" on Capitol Hill for his strict adherence to the document when voting on legislation – won't face any challengers for his House seat this year since he was the only person to file for the race.

The deadline to file in his 14th Congressional District was Friday.

Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas

The Liberty Committee, which Paul founded, pointed out the fact lawmakers need not bow to political pressure of parties or economic interests to be re-elected. Paul routinely votes against pork-barrel spending, for example, even opposing potential projects in his own district.

"There is one member of Congress who has proven time and again that consistently upholding the U.S. Constitution is actually good politics," said the Liberty Committee's executive director, Kent Snyder. "Contrary to the myth of the political elite, Congressman Paul not only gets re-elected, but does so by an increasing percentage every election."

Reported the Baytown Sun newspaper: "In the 14th District ... only incumbent Republican Ron Paul of Surfside had filed by the deadline. Paul ... is noted for his strict constructionist viewpoints and voting record – that is, he opposes any legislation that is not expressly authorized by the Constitution."

Said Snyder, "The political elite in Washington will ignore this myth-exploding event. The Establishment media won't report it. But Americans throughout our nation who believe in the principles expressed in the Declaration of Independence and codified by the Constitution of the United States should know about it."

The Liberty Caucus is a group of 22 U.S. House members who share Paul's commitment to the Constitution. The Liberty Committee has tens of thousands of members across the nation who support the organization's work.

Paul is a former Libertarian presidential candidate who has held his House seat since 1997. He is a medical doctor by trade who has delivered more than 4,000 babies in his lifetime.

---

[tpaine]

Thanks, but it's really a bit of preaching to the choir..
Those who need to read Ron Pauls message are patting themselves on the back over the state of the union.

[reelfoot]

Karl Rove must be deeply saddened.

[Dog Gone]

Oh brother. The demonization of Karl Rove has reached absurd levels.

If the White House had wanted to get rid of Ron Paul, they could easily have found a candidate to challenge him in the primary.

[Protagoras]

Ron Paul is among the most reviled people by the authoritarians here on FR.

[Protagoras]

I don't at all see him as a straight-laced conservative.

Which no one that I know of has ever described him as, including himself.

[Durus]

Could you please explain what a "straight-laced conservative" is? Could you also tell me where they derive their political beliefs from?

[myheroesareDeadandRegistered]

"Sometimes legislation that appears to be "conservative" actually oversteps the constitutional limits on federal government."

Bullseye, Whiteguy. Well said.

[reelfoot]

Karl Rove has demonized himself. Rove and Company don't like Paul, Tancredo, John Duncan, and others who will buck the party line to stand for principled conservatism and constitutional restrictions. If you think any of these conservative congressmen are among Rove's favorites, you are seriously mistaken.

[LibertarianInExile]

Yep, that might be it, too. It'd be nice to see there's a district that actually is full enough of voters who think that way.

[deport]

Rove and company have much bigger fish to fry than to worry about Paul or his re-election......

[reelfoot]

Yeah, the "fish" they're frying are anti-big government, anti-huge spending, anti-illegal immigrant conservatives. In short, anyone who won't swallow the party line.

[headsonpikes]

Bump.

Love your FReeper name! ;^)

[Dead Corpse]

Worry my ass. They should be emmulating Dr. Paul.

[deport]

They have a job to do..... Inauguration is Jan 20, 2005...... Five more years to go and then President Bush is outta there..... Not like the Congress critters that can go on and on and on and on and on..... forever.. They can't be bothering with those small fish, they have bigger ones to fry...

[No Dems 2004]

"Straight-laced conservatives do not vote to give their state & federal governments the authority to promote or discourage any particular social arrangements."

According to Ron Paul who I've developed a definite dislike for. That would work in the perfect world where pressure groups like the gays and abortionists don't exist who want to change the way America and the world think and force legislative nonsense into the states. And that's exactly why truly straight-laced conservatives must stand by their views and act on them. If the conservatives don't step in and try to regulate these things in the states, the liberals will (and already are). Sorry, but I just don't like Ron Paul - I've read his little assaults on President Bush and others and then I've looked at his own record and have never been impressed.

In my opinion, Ron Paul is just another hypocrite who we'd be better off without.

[Dead Corpse]

BS. I've been watching his voting record for the last couple years. He hasn't even come close to violating his principles.

If other "conservatives" are being "assaulted" by him, maybe they are not as conservative as they should be.

[Republican Wildcat]

I guess if you can't come up with legitimate criticism, just make something up.

[reelfoot]

Care to inform me what is being made up?

[No Dems 2004]

"Could you please explain what a "straight-laced conservative" is? Could you also tell me where they derive their political beliefs from?"

Sure ... they're conservatives who stand by their principles and don't waver because of their own little interpretation of the Constitution. I remember reading that Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma (who's closer to being a straight-laced conservative, imo) said he didn't really favoring amending the constitution, in general. But, he said he would support amending it to ban gay marriages because he felt it was necessary. To me, that's standing by principle. I don't mean to harp on the gay issue, but I'm just using it as an example.

I don't have anything against Paul himself, I just don't like it when he sanctimoniously proclaims himself the lone defender of the Constitution.

[bc2]

It may be "principled" to ammend the Constitution to ban gay marriage if that's what your principles are, but it would also for "principled" for HCI, Sarah Brady, ad nauseam, to call for an Amendment outlawing the 2nd Amendment (I think my brain just exploded on that one LOL)... BUT that is what they are doing. How very "principled".

I also do not want to harp on the gay issue, however a Constitutional amendment outlawing gay marriage would do far more damage in precident than it ever could do good to promote a "straight-laced conservative" platform. Do not forget that what you do today for "good" will be used to ram something truly evil down our throats later.

Ron Paul may not be the lone defender of the Constitution, but the 22 other members of his Liberty Committee are pretty sad in comparison to the 435 (?) other Members of Congress.

BTW do you know offhand how many members the Republican Liberty Caucus has? I'm going to go check right now...