PDA

View Full Version : An anti-Paul person is saying...




Jeremy
02-02-2008, 04:38 PM
edit: stop posting here. i dont want people bumping this thread because i dealt with it











On "RP gets most military donations"


http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/134410p.pdf

4.1.2.4. Make campaign contributions to another member of the Armed
Forces or an employee of the Federal Government.

Ron Paul is a employee of the federal government. So if he is getting these donations, hes getting them from people breaking the rules.

He also said I have no proof that its an inaccuracy and that he's "banned on Ron Paul forums when he shows them the link"

dealerjim
02-02-2008, 04:40 PM
Tell him/her that they are a liar.

KewlRonduderules
02-02-2008, 04:41 PM
uh, no.

:rolleyes:

Jeremy
02-02-2008, 04:41 PM
Tell him/her that they are a liar.

I did and they want proof...............

constitutional
02-02-2008, 04:41 PM
what are you talking about? Either make sense or don't post threads like these. Details please. :)

phill4paul
02-02-2008, 04:42 PM
I would say that Paul is not an employee. He is an elected representative.

JustBcuz
02-02-2008, 04:42 PM
Find out who that guy supports, then show him the (much smaller) amounts of military donations to his candidate.

If he won't fess up to being a McCain guy, just list all the remaining candidate's military donation totals, including Billary & Obama.

Jeremy
02-02-2008, 04:43 PM
what are you talking about? Either make sense or don't post threads like these. Details please. :)

Did you even click the link?

Wow....

Chester Copperpot
02-02-2008, 04:44 PM
This would explain why Ive heard Judge Andrew Napolitano say RP gets 50% of all the ex-military donations.. He said they cant donate while on active duty.. This must be what he was talking about.

Danny Molina
02-02-2008, 04:45 PM
odd...

RobHino
02-02-2008, 04:45 PM
4.1.1. A member on active duty may:
4.1.1.1. Register, vote, and express his or her personal opinion on political
candidates and issues, but not as a representative of the Armed Forces.
4.1.1.2. Make monetary contributions to a political organization.
4.1.1.3. Attend partisan and nonpartisan political meetings, rallies, or
conventions as a spectator when not in uniform.
4.1.2. A member on active duty shall not:
4.1.2.1. Use his or her official authority or influence for interfering with
an election; affecting the course or outcome of an election; soliciting votes for a
particular candidate or issue; or requiring or soliciting political contributions from others.
4.1.2.2. Be a candidate for, hold, or exercise the functions of civil office
except as authorized in paragraphs 4.2. and 4.3., below.
4.1.2.3. Participate in partisan political management, campaigns, or
conventions (unless attending a convention as a spectator when not in uniform).
4.1.2.4. Make campaign contributions to another member of the Armed
Forces or an employee of the Federal Government.

Did I mis-understand your point?

:confused:

ValidusCustodiae
02-02-2008, 04:46 PM
Did you even click the link?

Wow....

Yeah, you guys didn't know you sign away all your rights when you join the military?

Go defend the Constitution, but don't expect it to apply to you, you're a soldier!

B.S.

virginiakid
02-02-2008, 04:49 PM
That is if he were employed by the Fed government like being in the armed forces. Paul is not an employee, He is an elected official. Not only that, if that person you are talking to is correct then every presidential candidate is committing a crime and not knowing it. So this is pure garbage.

Goldwater Conservative
02-02-2008, 04:50 PM
Even if this guy is right, then Paul gets the most donations from veterans. What's his point?

Eponym_mi
02-02-2008, 04:50 PM
4.1.2.4. Make campaign contributions to another member of the Armed Forces or an employee of the Federal Government.

This does not apply. Ron Paul is not an employee. He is an elected official.

Jeremy
02-02-2008, 04:50 PM
OK, I dealt with this unless he posts another dumb thing

Don't post in this thread anymore.

Ogren
02-02-2008, 04:51 PM
These laws are hardly enforced. there quite irrelevant as most candidates running are employees of the federal government.

angelatc
02-02-2008, 04:54 PM
4.1.1. A member on active duty may:
4.1.1.1. Register, vote, and express his or her personal opinion on political
candidates and issues, but not as a representative of the Armed Forces.
4.1.1.2. Make monetary contributions to a political organization.
4.1.1.3. Attend partisan and nonpartisan political meetings, rallies, or
conventions as a spectator when not in uniform.


4.1.2. A member on active duty shall not:
4.1.2.1. Use his or her official authority or influence for interfering with
an election; affecting the course or outcome of an election; soliciting votes for a
particular candidate or issue; or requiring or soliciting political contributions from others.
4.1.2.2. Be a candidate for, hold, or exercise the functions of civil office
except as authorized in paragraphs 4.2. and 4.3., below.
4.1.2.3. Participate in partisan political management, campaigns, or
conventions (unless attending a convention as a spectator when not in uniform).
4.1.2.4. Make campaign contributions to another member of the Armed
Forces or an employee of the Federal Government.

Did I mis-understand your point?

:confused:

Me too.

NoMoreApathy
02-02-2008, 04:55 PM
Tell this person they are an idiot, and didn't even read the friggin source they gave you.

It says at the beginning of section 4.1:

A member on active duty MAY:

4.1.1.2. Make monetary contributions to a political organization


This, and elected officials are not employees of the government. You need to be resigned from a position as a government employee before you are allowed to run for election, meaning that an elected official is not an employee.

I'd say both of those points pretty much shoots your "friend" down.

Mark37snj
02-02-2008, 04:57 PM
Ron Paul is not an employee of the Federal Goverment, his is an employee of the State of Texas. And being an elected official is different than an employee. Im not sure how voting for of AGAINST pay raises works.

NoMoreApathy
02-02-2008, 05:01 PM
Ron Paul is not an employee of the Federal Goverment, his is an employee of the State of Texas.

He's NEITHER.

He's an elected official. Elected officials are not government employees. They dont' work for the government, they work for the people who elect them. No one in the US government tells an elected official what to do.

If elected officials were employees, they'd be bound by the government's Standard Operating Procedures, which they are not.

This goes for Federal, State, and Local.

lvenable
02-02-2008, 05:02 PM
I'm an Air Force veteran, and I not only contributed what little I could afford to a presidential campaign in 2000 and 2004, I also volunteered. The thing is, you CAN NOT "represent the Armed Forces" while doing such activities. That is, you can't be in uniform when you participate in political activities.

....Please don't ask me who I was supporting during that time. It's a sore subject that I'm really embarrassed about now. Let's just say I've made some big changes in the past year or so...

Anyway, as far as donating to someone running for president, I don't think there's any problem with it. I know I did it, and lots of my co-workers did too. Nobody ever said that you can't donate money to a campaign. The only thing that I heard talked about was the fact that you can't be in uniform or on duty when doing anything politically-related.

Mark37snj
02-02-2008, 05:08 PM
He's NEITHER.

He's an elected official. Elected officials are not government employees. They dont' work for the government, they work for the people who elect them. No one in the US government tells an elected official what to do.

If elected officials were employees, they'd be bound by the government's Standard Operating Procedures, which they are not.

This goes for Federal, State, and Local.

So then how does them being paid work? Does the state of Texas pay his salery on behalf of the people of Texas from their taxes? And how is that different then how employees gets paid? Is it just a technicality in the way the law is stated that makes them not an employee?