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 ...
You and Hillary, Kerry, Kennedy, Edwards and Obama share the same view.
It's not a view widely shared on this forum>
We want them to come home in victory and not with their "tails between their legs" like the returning vets from Vietnam had to endure.
Thankfully he has absolutely no chance of ever being President of the United States.
He's still in Congress!
Rightly or wrongly, though, term limits have turned into a dead letter issue since his re-election to Congress.
So, in other words, term limits were important to him once, but not important anymore now that he's exceeded his own original term limit promise.
"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.
Indeed.
Reagan pulled the marines out of Lebanon. Do you think he'd be stil be in Iraq?
No doubt Ron Paul is fantastic. What we love about him is what makes him so unelectable though. Imagining what a RP presidency would look like sure makes me smile.
"In other words, he wants to cut and run."
Yep. If he truly wanted to help the troops, he would help them get the job done, not stab them in the back and give a propaganda victory to the mullahs.
Ron Paul is worse than the Murtha Democrats, because Ron Paul knows better.
"Imagining what a RP presidency would look like sure makes me smile."
Makes the terrorists smile, too.
You may be wasting bandwidth - but he is a better choice than ole Rudy.
Put me on the ping list. Paul is da man!
Ron Paul wants Saddam back in power. Too bad for Ron.
Wow I had not idea that Paul supported some of these! (though I should have guessed), (most of the time I hear: R. Paul supports, this or that, but I don't hear the reason behind it..I am becoming more a Ron Paul fan EVERY day)..! I could vote for him.
One question -- Yes, or No:
Yes, or No?
You got that right!
Ron Paul is a cut and run coward.
You're right. Paul knows better. He knew back in 2002 that starry-eyed predictions that Iraqis would embrace liberty and democracy, that the war "would pay for itself" via Iraqi oil, that the other dominoes would soon fall for liberty, etc. were nonsense. He knew that this would be a ntion-building, Wilsonian quagmire, long before others did.
Yes, or No?
Intrigued...please add me to the GRPPL!
Thanks~
keeper
See #36
And we've been paying for Reagan's greatest mistake - i.e. sending a message of capitulatory weakness to Islamists -ever since.
Then he reveals himself to be as corruptible as any member of Congress.
really?
as corrupt as duke cunningham?
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.