That's Ron Paul on the left.
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 ...
Ron Paul made it abundantly clear that he would have voted against the war if it had ever come to s specific vote.
This kind of evasive talk cannot dodge the reality that Ron Paul thinks that appeasing terrorists is the way to go.
Give me the Arabic spelling of Al Dawa and I will tell you what it means.
He was killed by the Saddam regime in Baghdad.
Wow. You would think it would have more syllables, what with the adjective and all.
So... One question -- Yes, or No:
Yes, or No?
After he was living openly in there for many years. Forgot that one there half truth teller.
"Congressman 'No.'" voted "Yes" with the democrats to reprimand Bush for sending reinforcements that were requested by the commanding generals to Iraq.
"Congressman 'No.'" is "Candidate ... 'No.'"
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.
So becasue the methods of delivery you cited are still very real threats, what would this suggest about the effectiveness of efforts being made to date?
Again, if you give me the spelling (in Arabic) I can give you the meaning. Or link to it so I can see it.
No, actually. Thanks to guys like boy Assad and I'mIndeedaWhackjob, we can still be attacked by a bunch of funded and trained terrorists.
Don't breathe too deeply, you'll drown in sand, you know.
You continue to regurgitate what sounds like liberal-DU word-herding to support a cut-and-run loser, and your arguments are full of holes.
Can't you do any better than that?
This thread is filling up with re-runs.
Wrong again. He entered Iraq as a Yemeni, and after revealing himself, the Saddam regime assassinated him.
Twenty-one defendants accused of bombing the U.S. and French Embassies last December were formally arraigned today, as their trial began under extreme security.
To be tried in absentia are four defendants who are at large, the prosecutor general said.
Five people were killed and 86 injured in the rash of bombings on Dec. 12. Besides the U.S. and French embassies, four Kuwaiti targets were bombed.
The prosecution has demanded the death penalty for 19 of the defendants. The others are believed to have played a lesser role in the bombings in and around the capital of this oil-rich Arab nation . . . Of the other defendants, 17 are Iraqis; two, Lebanese, three, Kuwaitis and two are stateless. Most of them said they belonged to Al-Dawa (Islamic Call) Party, an Iraqi movement of Shiite Moslem fanatics who are pro-Iranian, said court sources who asked not to be identified. ~~ http://www.juancole.com/2006/07/congress-expects-islamic-dawa-to.html
No, he was responsible for recruiting anti-Saddam activists in Damascus on behalf of the Iraqi National Congress.
But nice try.
Wrong again yourself. Get your facts straight. He lived in Iraq openly for several years before he was killed.
"The Bush administration paid the Iraqi National Congress $400K/month to tell them such poppycock."
Here just from hitting the "search" feature right here on FR and giving you the first two hits:
Two tonnes of enriched uranium (enough for several bombs) removed from Iraq in 2004:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1514112/posts
And you can follow the entire NYT story here. Basically, the NYT slammed the Bush admin for releasing Iraq secret nuclear documetns --- and thereby allegedly accidently helping Iran's with its nuclear program. Ironcially, in the NYT hit piece, it admits that Iraq was a year away from a workable device, a terribly inconsistent opinion with the "Saddam had no nuclear program" Dim talking point.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1731259/posts
Twenty-one defendants accused of bombing the U.S. and French Embassies last December were formally arraigned today, as their trial began under extreme security.
To be tried in absentia are four defendants who are at large, the prosecutor general said.
Five people were killed and 86 injured in the rash of bombings on Dec. 12. Besides the U.S. and French embassies, four Kuwaiti targets were bombed.
The prosecution has demanded the death penalty for 19 of the defendants. The others are believed to have played a lesser role in the bombings in and around the capital of this oil-rich Arab nation . . . Of the other defendants, 17 are Iraqis; two, Lebanese, three, Kuwaitis and two are stateless. Most of them said they belonged to Al-Dawa (Islamic Call) Party, an Iraqi movement of Shiite Moslem fanatics who are pro-Iranian, said court sources who asked not to be identified. ~~ http://www.juancole.com/2006/07/congress-expects-islamic-dawa-to.html
Are the Embassy bombers ruling Iraq from foreign jail cells?
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.