Representative Paul of Texas votes against Australia

US House of Representatives | self

[ProudFossil]

The House of Representatives just passed a resolution commemorating the 50 year anniversary of the close relationship between the US and Australia. Republican Representative Paul of Texas is the only dissenting vote.

[KQQL]

No I am not joeyooo.
Just because you don't like what I said about Ron paul, that does not mean you have to make me somebody/
or name me something I am not.
We still live in a free country, and if I don't like how Ron Paul votes , you don't have to get all worked up.

It's a free country, I am entitled to my say on how Ron Paul votes.
Free expression is still O.k in the USA, and let me remind you we don't live under the Taliban.
If I think Ron Paul is a moron, this only my humble opinion, and I am sure it does not reflect the thought my many people who admire him here.
There is a reason there is the Free Speach in the USA.
Have a nice day.

[KQQL]

ditto

[Twodees]

No, that doesn't tell anyone anything about his character. it can say an awful lot, though, about what kind of compromising or nullifying amendment language was tacked onto a bill by opponents. What was that bill number, anyway? I'll look it up.

[CWOJackson]

Australia has just announced that they are sending 1,550 troops to fight alongside our own. Thanks Aussies.

[Aerial]

LOL!

[Twodees]

Oh, of course, the ACU hands him a 95% rating. How very very and too too. Don't fret, billyboy. You'll get your liberal senator from the Party of Gomer to replace Gramm. Just don't insult conservatives by claiming that he's one of us. You're not one of us either.

[Texasforever]

It was a resolution NOT a bill. Ron Paul had two career choices being a research subject or a politician. He chose politics. The guy is a rebel looking for a cause. He is harmless and gives those that are in the same frame of mind someone to rally around. And yes I have followed Ron Paul's "carrer" for many years and he is a certified "character" in the same vein as Lyndon LaRouche.

[ICU812]

Ron ran for president as a libertarian, then became a Republican. Almost.

He was a Republican congressman before he became the Libertarian Party's presidential candidate. Then he switched his party affiliation back to Republican. But he's always been a libertarian, past, present and future.

[ICU812]

If he REALLY had "principles" , he wouldn't run under fraudulant colors.

Fraudulent colors eh? Is there some kind of bylaw in the Republican Party charter that say all members must be neo-cons? Is Paul misrepresenting his stand on the issues to his constituents who keep re-electing him over and over?

I think what eats you up is that he is the best man in your party :-)

[nopardons]

No, not they must be " neocons "; which I am not one of, dear. But a REPUBLICAN isn't a Libertarian. And no, Pual most certainly is NOT " the best " in the GOP. He is a fraud ; plain and simple, but the ONLY elected offical that the Libertarians can sort of claim as their own. In truth, since he is NOT an " ELECTED " Libertarian, they shouldn't claim him as one of them either. But then, whom else would they have to have as champion ? LOL

[sadimgnik]

I fully support Representative Paul in this matter, and I only wish he would go even farther. I am personally urging my own Congressman to declare war on Australia, as retaliation for its unprovoked act of terrorism upon the United States. I am, of course, referring to the unleashing of Steve "Crocodile Hunter" Irwin upon unsuspecting Americans. Know this, Aussies - this horrific act has put you beyond the pale, outside the community of civilized nations. I demand that you withdraw this weapon of mass-destruction immediately, and begin making reparations to the millions of innocent, yet permanently scarred victims. Otherwise, we shall have no choice but to respond in kind. I await your response.

Oi!! Don't blame us! It's all the fault of that wife of his, Terri!

And just which country is she from, hmm? I'll give you a clue: Eugene, Oregon ain't down under! :-)

Actually, Irwin is probably one of the best businessmen you will ever meet, and apparently a genuinely nice bloke to boot.

Regards

Sadim

[ICU812]

I think the people who are perceiving this as a snub against Australia are off base here. I suspect Ron Paul voted against this resolution for the same reason he'd vote against National Hotdog Week. He has a very narrowly defined idea of what the Constitutional powers and duties of Congress are and anything that is outside of that definition gets an automatic no vote.

[FreedomPoster]

Oi!! He's a BIG one!

LOL. Ever see Irwin parody on South Park? It's hilarious.

Even with Irwin, the balance of accounts says that Australia is a great ally. Too bad about the idiot gun laws and creeping total socialism, though. We really need an Australia that is strong militarily and economically, and these hold you/them back.

[ICU812]

No, not they must be " neocons "; which I am not one of, dear.

Yes ma'am you are. You are certainly not an ideological descendant of the Old Right, the pre-FDR, pre-National Review right that believed in non-intervention abroad and personal freedoms at home. Dear? Hmmmm.

But a REPUBLICAN isn't a Libertarian.

No, a conservative isn't a libertarian. A Republican can be.

And no, Pual most certainly is NOT " the best " in the GOP.

I suppose it depends on your criteria.

He is a fraud ; plain and simple, but the ONLY elected offical that the Libertarians can sort of claim as their own. In truth, since he is NOT an " ELECTED " Libertarian, they shouldn't claim him as one of them either.

Understand this, libertarianism is to the Libertarian Party, what liberalism is to the Democrats. One is an ideology and the other is a political affiliation, they are related but not identical. You can be a liberal and not be a Democrat, for example you could be in the Green Party or you could be Trent Lott. While Ron Paul is undeniably a Republican he is no neo-con, he is an advocate of libertarianism and for that reason we proudly and rightly claim him as our ideological kin.

But then, whom else would they have to have as champion ? LOL

Speaking for myself, I'm kind of partial to Congressmen Patrick Toomey and Jim DeMint(both Republicans, both libertarians to varying degrees).

[Dane]

I think the people who are perceiving this as a snub against Australia are off base here. I suspect Ron Paul voted against this resolution for the same reason he'd vote against National Hotdog Week. He has a very narrowly defined idea of what the Constitutional powers and duties of Congress are and anything that is outside of that definition gets an automatic no vote

You are still not getting the point. You see by voting no, he(Ron Paul) is transmitting that he can't even show a gesture of goodwill to a staunch ally of the US. Really what harm comes from a resolution saying thank you to Australia for 50 years of support?

By voting no, Ron Paul transmits that he is a hard edged idealogue, whose ideology trumps common snese and courtesy.

[ICU812]

Well, one person's "hard edged idealogue" is another's principled iconoclast. Different strokes for different folks.

[general_re]

Oi!! He's a BIG one!

"And isn't he a BEAOOOOTY? Look at that! But he's really mad, and I don't blame him a bit, 'cause I've got my thumb right in his arse! There you go, little fella!"

Oh yeah, we can really pin all that on Terri.

Actually, Steve went a long way towards redeeming himself last year, when he did those Fedex commercials - you know, like the one where he gets bitten by the super-deadly snake and collapses. I taped that one, and now, sometimes I just like to pull that tape out and watch it over and over and over until I feel better ;)

[no-s]

That doesn't look like a resolution requiring a vote. It looks like remarks. Why are you a Ron Paul basher?