Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 34

Thread: House Vote to Condemn MoveOn Ad

  1. #1

    Default House Vote to Condemn MoveOn Ad

    Which way did Ron Paul vote on this?
    "Disobedience, in the eyes of anyone who has read history, is man's original virtue. It is through disobedience and rebellion that progress has been made." -- Oscar Wilde



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2

    Default

    He voted for it

  4. #3

    Default

    I was only aware of a Senate vote on this....you have a link?

  5. #4

  6. #5

  7. #6

    Default

    Raising the issue to a vote is stupid, but if you are forced to vote yea or nay, I don't see anything in Ron Paul's ideology that prevents him from voting yea on that idiotic roll call.

  8. #7

    Default

    Strange, I heard him say in an interview afterwards that this was all about political grandstanding...why did he take part in the vote?
    "Disobedience, in the eyes of anyone who has read history, is man's original virtue. It is through disobedience and rebellion that progress has been made." -- Oscar Wilde

  9. #8

    Default

    how about the text of H J Resolution 52?

  10. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ctb619 View Post
    how about the text of H J Resolution 52?
    Not voted upon yet:
    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=hj110-52

  11. #10

    Default

    OK...maybe I'm missing something, but in the first link you provided, what is it exactly that Ron Paul voted 'Yea' on?

  12. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ctb619 View Post
    OK...maybe I'm missing something, but in the first link you provided, what is it exactly that Ron Paul voted 'Yea' on?
    A useless toothless "you were a bad boy" name calling by the congress toward moveon.org.

  13. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OptionsTrader View Post
    Raising the issue to a vote is stupid, but if you are forced to vote yea or nay, I don't see anything in Ron Paul's ideology that prevents him from voting yea on that idiotic roll call.
    well.. moveon.org is a private organization. I would have voted no

  14. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ctb619 View Post
    OK...maybe I'm missing something, but in the first link you provided, what is it exactly that Ron Paul voted 'Yea' on?
    I don't know, but I would also like clarification on everything in the bill...maybe there was more to it, or that is not the same bill...?

    Doesn't make sense to me that RP would vote just to condemn an advertisement legally made by a private organization.
    "Disobedience, in the eyes of anyone who has read history, is man's original virtue. It is through disobedience and rebellion that progress has been made." -- Oscar Wilde

  15. #14

    Default

    sorry to keep bothering you, but do you happen to have a link to the text of the "condemnation"?

  16. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ctb619 View Post
    sorry to keep bothering you, but do you happen to have a link to the text of the "condemnation"?
    Don't have a link to the verbiage of the bill, nor did I care enough about the non-issue to read the betray-us advertisement. I honestly could not care less about the whole thing. If Paul found the bill worthy of a yea I'm sure he has his reasons, but no funding was required to "condemn" the ad, so I don't care.

  17. #16

    Default

    I would much rather congress condemn adds then spend money.
    Checkout Ron Paul's legislation, write your representatives and spread the word!
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legisla...ed_by_Ron_Paul

    Lord of the Rings and Liberty: http://www.lewrockwell.com/carson/carson10.html

  18. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Richandler View Post
    I would much rather congress condemn adds then spend money.
    they are spending money.. who do you think pays their electricity? who pays their salaries? What a waste. Democratic majority? lol apparently made no difference

  19. #18

    Default

    I really would like to know why Ron Paul vote Yes on this. Isn't this a Free Speech issue. If anyone has any link to his voting Yes or an explanation on why he voted yes, please post it.

    How does the Constitution fit into this?

  20. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lois View Post
    I really would like to know why Ron Paul vote Yes on this. Isn't this a Free Speech issue. If anyone has any link to his voting Yes or an explanation on why he voted yes, please post it.

    How does the Constitution fit into this?
    maybe to save face? they would have bashed him allday for voting no

  21. #20

    Default

    this is Ron Paul minutiae. i am ok w/ you guys posting and threading about this, but IMO there are better things you can be doing. Just IMO, i am libertarian so do as you please.

  22. #21

    Default

    This has nothing to do with free speech. It doesn't mean that moveon.org has to take down their ad. If that were the case, Paul would have voted against. It seems more like a personal feeling vote to me. You can have a personal feeling of condemnation for something someone says, and at the same time can support their right to say it. So maybe he personally felt that it was a bad ad, but that doesn't mean that he's against free speech. Get a hold of yourselves people.
    Last edited by Ron Paul Fan; 09-27-2007 at 06:53 AM.
    "Instead of the “end of history,” we are now experiencing the end of a vocal limited-government movement in our nation’s capital. While most conservatives no longer defend balanced budgets and reduced spending, most liberals have grown lazy in defending civil liberties and now are approving wars that we initiate. The so-called “third way” has arrived and, sadly, it has taken the worst of what the conservatives and liberals have to offer." -Ron Paul

  23. #22

    Default

    And it isn't like he called the vote.

    If there was a vote called by some other silly Congressman, asking for a vote of "Is Spinach flavor your favorite type of cookie?", and Ron Paul being a chocolate chip man, felt he wanted to press the Nay button, that is fine with me. Was it unnecessary for the other congressman to call this ludicrous action to vote? Yes. Was it a waste of time for the House to bother with this? Yes.

    They asked him what his opinion was of Spinach cookies, and he told them, big deal, he likes Chocolate over Spinach.

  24. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mordechai Vanunu View Post
    Strange, I heard him say in an interview afterwards that this was all about political grandstanding...why did he take part in the vote?
    Maybe because the bill linked is this: Making continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 2008, and for other purposes.
    Our rights are not derived from man but exist because we are men.

  25. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Paul Fan View Post
    This has nothing to do with free speech. It doesn't mean that moveon.org has to take down their ad. If that were the case, Paul would have voted against. It seems more like a personal feeling vote to me. You can have a personal feeling of condemnation for something someone says, and at the same time can support their right to say it. So maybe he personally felt that it was a bad ad, but that doesn't mean that he's against free speech. Get a hold of yourselves people.
    Doesn't make sense to me. So the congress now votes which ads they like and which ones they don't?
    Sigue la rEVOLución en español.
    Follow the rEVOLution in spanish.

  26. #25

    Default

    The bill linked at the beginning of this thread is an appropriations bil
    Our rights are not derived from man but exist because we are men.

  27. #26

    Default

    I suppose it was worth condemning, but all negative ads making personal attacks are. I can't believe that the United States Congress is voting on a bill about some ad than ran once in a newspaper weeks ago.
    "It's not what you say, it's what they hear." - [Frank] Luntz, Maslansky Strategic Research slogan

  28. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phil M View Post
    I suppose it was worth condemning, but all negative ads making personal attacks are. I can't believe that the United States Congress is voting on a bill about some ad than ran once in a newspaper weeks ago.
    Ya, I'm shocked.
    Personally, I'd rather they waste their time on stupidity like this than actual bills. They cause far less damage that way.
    Our rights are not derived from man but exist because we are men.

  29. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Spanish for Ron View Post
    Doesn't make sense to me. So the congress now votes which ads they like and which ones they don't?
    I guess so. I'm not defending the vote itself, I think it's a complete waste of time. I was defending Congressman Paul's vote which has nothing to do with the 1st amendment. And the bill cited is correct. Here is some text of the Appropriations Bill, H.J. Res 52 where the ad is mentioned towards the bottom.

    http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/...ifiyRZ:e16991:
    "Instead of the “end of history,” we are now experiencing the end of a vocal limited-government movement in our nation’s capital. While most conservatives no longer defend balanced budgets and reduced spending, most liberals have grown lazy in defending civil liberties and now are approving wars that we initiate. The so-called “third way” has arrived and, sadly, it has taken the worst of what the conservatives and liberals have to offer." -Ron Paul

  30. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Paul Fan View Post
    I guess so. I'm not defending the vote itself, I think it's a complete waste of time. I was defending Congressman Paul's vote which has nothing to do with the 1st amendment. And the bill cited is correct. Here is some text of the Appropriations Bill, H.J. Res 52 where the ad is mentioned towards the bottom.

    http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/...ifiyRZ:e16991:
    And THAT is why I hate tacking other stuff onto bills. He obviously felt a need to vote for the appropriations bill and the condemnation was obviously unimportant enough that he didn't bother fighting the bill for this stupidity.
    Our rights are not derived from man but exist because we are men.

  31. #30

    Default

    Off topic, but if you want something worthy of condemnation, which Congressman Paul did condemn to the Fed Chairman's face and precious few politicians have the balls to condemn:

    The obliteration of the value of my dollars in the bank (Chart of U.S. Dollar Index Futures):

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast





« Previous Thread | Next Thread »


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •