Which way did Ron Paul vote on this?
Site Information
About Us
- RonPaulForums.com is an independent grassroots outfit not officially connected to Ron Paul but dedicated to his mission. For more information see our Mission Statement.
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
He voted for it
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.
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
Not voted upon yet:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=hj110-52
OK...maybe I'm missing something, but in the first link you provided, what is it exactly that Ron Paul voted 'Yea' on?
"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
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.
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
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?
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.
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 05:53 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
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.
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.
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
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
Our rights are not derived from man but exist because we are men.
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):
Connect With Us