PDA

View Full Version : Paul recently dropped out of the presidential race? News to me???




TobyPA
04-10-2008, 08:01 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/04/09/house.olympics/index.html

"WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The U.S. House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed a resolution Wednesday calling on China to end its crackdown on Tibet and release Tibetans imprisoned for "nonviolent" demonstrations.


Tibetan monks protest in San Francisco along the Olympic torch's 85,000-mile route toward Beijing.

The vote was 413-1. Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, who recently dropped out of the presidential race, was the lone congressman voting against it...."


This is total BS! He opposed it because the so called resolution wants to "also asks the State Department to reconsider its decision to exclude China from its list of countries considered the "world's most systematic human rights violators,"
Also the statement about RP is total and complete BULL, so is the rest of the article

acptulsa
04-10-2008, 08:06 AM
News to everyone. Email them and call their lies. That's not news, it's views.

Staupostek
04-10-2008, 08:24 AM
That's not news, it's views.

Is there a difference anymore?

acptulsa
04-10-2008, 08:36 AM
Is there a difference anymore?

Was there ever? Yes, there's a difference. There's journalism and there's yellow journalism, and that's the way it's always been. The only difference over time is a varying proportional ratio. At the moment, the bs/journalism ratio is way too high.

freesoul
04-10-2008, 11:39 AM
LOL they already changed it!!!!

mello
04-10-2008, 12:23 PM
Now it says:

"The vote was 413-1. Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, who
has not dropped out of the presidential race,
was the lone congressman voting against it."

I wonder how many minutes it took to bury CNN's
email server?

Give me liberty
04-10-2008, 01:08 PM
There playing Mind warfare games on you.

SimpleName
04-10-2008, 05:42 PM
Same stuff as always. The journalist probably doesn't even know. He is just as ill-informed as the general public I'd suppose. This bill doesn't seem to have really had any negative effects on anyone. I haven't seen the bill itself obviously, but no real resources are being used up as far as I can see, so I'm not sure why Paul would not vote for it. No taxpayer money is involved, no inflation is caused. It is just a general message sent to China to tell them that we'd like them to stop abusing the rights of Tibetans. I understand not getting involved in their affairs, but simply asking them to pay more attention to the natural rights of human beings doesn't sound like too much.

thuja
04-10-2008, 05:54 PM
Same stuff as always. The journalist probably doesn't even know. He is just as ill-informed as the general public I'd suppose. This bill doesn't seem to have really had any negative effects on anyone. I haven't seen the bill itself obviously, but no real resources are being used up as far as I can see, so I'm not sure why Paul would not vote for it. No taxpayer money is involved, no inflation is caused. It is just a general message sent to China to tell them that we'd like them to stop abusing the rights of Tibetans. I understand not getting involved in their affairs, but simply asking them to pay more attention to the natural rights of human beings doesn't sound like too much.
it certainly will not make him popular.

CountryboyRonPaul
04-10-2008, 11:54 PM
He voted against it cause it's a waste of everybody's time.


Congress is basically saying, "Hey China, you better stop that or we're gonna....


Write you a Letter! :mad:"