Ron Paul Has Put Me on The Fence....

fox news ^

[Texaggie79]

Just saw Ron Paul on H&C. I hate to admit that I have always skimmed through his speeches on the floor, because I just assumed he was off base.

"Transferring war power to the President is unconstitutional"..... "We would have to change an amendment"....... Arguments posed by Doctor Paul.

On these terms, he is starting to win me over.

I still disagree that this is a non-provoked, because I believe that Saddam's refusal to obey the resolutions that kept him in power for 12 years is more than enough to act on. If we give in and do not follow through with the threat, how can our other enemies take us at our word? (hint:China.....Taiwan.....)

So, anti-war folks (if there are any left, teehee), have at me, pro-war folks, tell me how this transfer is not unconstitutional.

[tpaine]

"All I did was point out that the claim that there is an unconstitutional transfer of power is wrong, and you, for some reason, took personal offense to it." -CNN-

Absolute bull. You posted to me at 57, I made a civil response at 59, and you then made a personal attack at 71.
You are a really dumb liar, as anyone can see. - Read the posts.

[jwalsh07]

The War Power Act of 1973 frankly is unconstitutional

Interesting, that is Ron Paul's view as well and every President who has occupied the office since. Each and every one has standing to challenge the constitutionality in court. Yet they don't which, of course, is a question dying to be answered.

The War Powers Act is currently the law of the land. Saying it's unconstitutional and using that as a basis to declare every armed intervention authorized by Congress as unauthorized and unconstitutional is an exercise in futility.

[ConservativeNewsNetwork]

I still don't see what you found so offensive. It seemed to me that you were one of those people that thinks because they take the view opposite from the majority it somehow makes them right - a reverse argumentum ad populum. I never called you a moron, I pointed out that there is no logic to claiming because most people on FR believe something it must be wrong. The reason I said you were short on substance is because I hadn't seen anything from you relating to the actual issue. The original poster seemed to support Ron Paul, so there was no reason to doubt what they said he said. I think what happened was you probably realized that the claim that the act (that has passed, fyi) is an unconstitutional transfer of power was bogus, and didn't believe that Ron Paul could ever be wrong. Oh well.

[Anitius Severinus Boethius]

There have been 11 official declarations of war declared by Congress in the history of our Republic. These are:

June 18th, 1812 - Great Britain
May 13, 1846 - Mexico
April 25, 1898 - Spain
April 6, 1917 - Germany
December 7, 1917 - Austria-Hungary
December 8, 1941 - Japan
December 11, 1941 - Germany
December 11, 1941 - Italy
June 5, 1942 - Bulgaria
June 5, 1942 - Hungary
June 5, 1942 - Romania

In addition, there have been 9 instances where Congress has approved the use of military force against nations, or in defense of nations. These I list along with the President in charge at the time of the authorization.

France - 1798 - John Adams
Barbary Pirates - 1801 - Thomas Jefferson
Barbary Pirates - 1815 - James Madison
Africa Slavers - 1820 - James Monroe
Paraguay - 1859 - James Buchanan
Lebanon - 1958 - Dwight Eisenhower
Vietnam - 1964 - Lyndon Johnson
Lebanon - 1982 - Ronald Reagan
Iraq - 1991 - George H.W. Bush

If Adams, Jefferson, and Madison didn't have a problem with Congress authorizing military actions without a Declaration of War, then perhaps the protests that it undermines the Constitution is flawed.

[tpaine]

"I never called you a moron," - CNN

Do you have anything of substance to say, or are you just being a reverse bandwagon moron? You realize that just because the majority supports something doesn't mean it is wrong, don't you?
71 posted on 10/10/02 7:34 AM Pacific by ConservativeNewsNetwork
_________________________________

You really believe your own bull, don't you? - Lord, what an idiot.

[GunRunner]

No, that much is not clear. The Congress has the power to declare war. This does not mean that the President must authorize every military engagement through the Congress. There have been 4 times as many military skirmishes as there have been presidents, from John Adams undeclared war against France, to Jefferson's War on the Barbary Pirates and the Tripolitan War, all the way to Reagan's invasion of Grenada.

The Constitution says nothing about passing a resolution, it is not obviously in keeping with the Constitution, since the word is nowhere to be found.

In my view, Article 1 Sectino 8 of the Constitution was a way to throw a bone to those who knew they would be future legislators. Its basically saying, "OK, Congress you can have a little input in military matters too." Even though most, if not all military power is given to the President as Commander in Chief of the military.

I like and respect Dr. Paul, but I certainly trust the constitutional wisdom of Adams, Jefferson, and Reagan over his.

[ConservativeNewsNetwork]

I never called you a moron. Read what you quoted.

Again, why are you so worked up over this Ron Paul guy? Your chosen god is wrong, big deal. Get over it. That's the problem with hero worship: Heros are only human.

[tpaine]

Whos worked up?
It's amusing as hell to see you try to lie your way out of the obvious.

[ConservativeNewsNetwork]

You can't read, and take things too personally. I haven't lied about anything.

[tpaine]

Anyone here can read your lies.
- And the 'personal' thing is easy to correct, by you. Stop running about initiating personal remarks, as you did here at #71.

[Chancellor Palpatine]

His chosen god, Ron Paul, once again is the sole person in government channeling the spirit and intent of the founding fathers. Didn't you know that he is the only infallible popelike voice among 435 Congressmen, 100 Senators, and the President and Vice President of the US? LOL.

Actually, like most Libertarian parasites everywhere, who gleefully suck off the benefits of society while decrying the basic social order that makes society work, tpaine is simply doing his tapeworm act.

[Kangaroo Court]

Ron Paul sucks off the benefits of running as a Republican, yet is a Libertarian. That right there makes me doubt his high and mighty conscience. I saw him on several shows this week, FOX as well as the liberal MSNBC and CNN. The liberal media like to trot out the "conservative" who along with the liberal Dims vote and speak against this administration and Republicans.

[tpaine]

Ron Paul is not anyones 'god'.

And actually, like most communitarian parasites everywhere, who gleefully suck off the benefits of society while decrying our basic constitutional principles that makes society work, -- the 'palpatine chancellor' is simply doing his scumbag act as a wannabe member of FRs anti-libertarian group.

[ConservativeNewsNetwork]

How can people read what isn't there? I have never lied in this thread. It's easy to accuse others of personal attacks and lies when you never make any concrete arguments. Do you serve any other purpose than to snidely insult anyone on FR that has different politics than you, and that refuses to worship Ron Paul as you do? There's something to be said about a person that worships a politician that pretends to be something he isn't.

Tpaine, you're a self-righteous moron. There. I just insulted you. Happy now?

[Black Agnes]

You dope smoking libertarian!

[tpaine]

Ron Paul is one of the leaders of the Republicans RLC group. JR thought enough of the Caucus to establish a separate forum on FR, here:

RLC Liberty Caucus | latest posts
Address:http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/rlc/browse

Read their 'position', which JR also posted. All real conservatives could support the RLC.
Rino's cannot.

[tpaine]

You first made an insulting remark at #71, and have been make petty lies, trying to weasel out of it ever since. - You're a pitiful joke.

[tpaine]

Naaa, poor tex is just a confused semi-communitarian, who likes to razz his betters. He'll grow up some day.

[DugwayDuke]

If you think Ron Paul's arguments make sense then you must also believe that Eisenhower committed an un-Constitutional act when he invaded Germany in 1944. Sure, Congress may have declared war in 1941, but they could not "delegate" to Roosevelt/Eisenhower the decision to invade Germany in 1944. Therefore Roosevelt/Eisenhower should have come back to Congress to request permission.

[Kevin Curry]

There's something to be said about a person that worships a politician that pretends to be something he isn't.

I agree. tpaine's support of Ron Paul has done more to diminish Ron Paul's reputation in my eyes than anything Ron Paul himself might have done (apart from kissing Hillary Clinton full on the lips).

As championed by tpaine, Ron Paul is a moronic, feckless poseur--a gadfly whose grasp on power is almost as tenuous as his grasp on reality.

There may be more to Ron Paul. There may be a lot more. But judging purely from the supporters he attracts, I have my doubts.