Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Iwo Jima; Calvinist_Dark_Lord

I wouldn’t call a finger-in-the-wind approach as “strong” on border security. According to his statement, he’s not really for the fence and wouldn’t support it other than for items he agreed with in the bill, which is now law. There are other times when he’s stated that a fence “isn’t the right thing to do”.

He did vote against putting troops on the border....5 times. That’s a weakness on his part as he doesn’t know how to defend the border from the Mexican Army who were taking pop-shots at our border agents.


73 posted on 09/22/2007 8:11:45 AM PDT by RasterMaster (Rudy McRomneyson = KENNEDY wing of the Republican Party)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies ]


To: RasterMaster
He did vote against putting troops on the border....5 times. That’s a weakness on his part as he doesn’t know how to defend the border from the Mexican Army who were taking pop-shots at our border agents.

Simple answer: Shoot back. THAT is a Libertarian response, as well as a Republican one. When proof of Mexican army incursion on the southern border is proven (and it would be under those circumstances), "other" measures would happen...and the Mexican army wouldn't do it again...

75 posted on 09/22/2007 8:15:58 AM PDT by Calvinist_Dark_Lord ((I have come here to kick @$$ and chew bubblegum...and I'm all outta bubblegum! ~Roddy Piper))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies ]

To: RasterMaster
He did vote against putting troops on the border....5 times....

You may want to look at what else was in those bills.

If they were 'naked' bills (no amendments), then there's an issue. If not, Paul's NO vote probably had nothing to do with the main part of the bill.

If you look at the process that a bill goes through with amendments and attachments, it is truly frightening.

78 posted on 09/22/2007 8:20:03 AM PDT by Calvinist_Dark_Lord ((I have come here to kick @$$ and chew bubblegum...and I'm all outta bubblegum! ~Roddy Piper))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies ]

To: RasterMaster
I would not have agreed to put the military on the border before 9/11. In fact, it is only in the last couple of years that I have agreed with that.

If Duncan Hunter and others were ahead of the curve, well good for them. They had the "benefit" of seeing the Mexican invasion first hand, as I and others did not.
96 posted on 09/22/2007 9:13:27 AM PDT by Iwo Jima ("Close the border. Then we'll talk.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies ]

To: RasterMaster
****I wouldn’t call a finger-in-the-wind approach as “strong” on border security. According to his statement, he’s not really for the fence and wouldn’t support it other than for items he agreed with in the bill, which is now law. There are other times when he’s stated that a fence “isn’t the right thing to do”.****

I don’t know about the fence issue, but I have heard Ron Paul say that you can’t be a sovereign nation if you don’t have secure borders. (or words to that effect.)

117 posted on 09/22/2007 10:33:04 AM PDT by jmeagan (Our last chance to change the direction of the country--Ron Paul)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson