Im sick and tired of the McCain/Obama bashing by the Paul supporters

Title speaks for itself. I know many here on ATS love Ron Paul, and thats fine. I'll get flamed to the stone age for this, and that too is fine. But Im sick of it. On almost every thread dedicated to either McCain or Obama, someone comes in and calls them both the scum of the earth and that we should either write in ron paul, or complains about why Ron Paul isnt in the election.


Ron Paul isnt mr. perfect folks.

Ron Paul voted against the prohibition of cloning.

He voted against the Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 1999, the Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2001 and the Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004.

He voted against banning the burning of the U.S. Flag.

He voted against the Anti Terrorism Act of 2001.

He voted against the Same Sex Marriage Resolution.

He voted against the AIDS Assistance Bill.

He voted against a nationwide AMBER alert system.

He voted against the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act.

He voted against the Condemning Iraq Abuse of Prisoners Resolution.

He voted against the Reduction of Spam Bill (a.k.a. CAN-SPAM Act).

He voted against the Do-Not-Call Registry Bill.

He has expressed interest in ending the war on drugs, as well as legalizing marijuana.


The last one is what gets most young folks. Fine, legalize it. But that doesnt take away from some of the many good bills he voted against. Here in Las Vegas, an amber alert went out on a 6 year old boy who was taken from his parents at gunpoint. Apparently, his family owed a hefty sum of money t oa mexican drug cartel. This innocent child's only chance was when all of us in Las Vegas were notified on our radios on the description of the boy and the perp's. Then the make and model of the car with a license plate was made available. then the amber alert went nationwide. If Ron Paul had his was, none of that ever would of been known.

This does not make Ron Paul better or worse. But Im really sick of people bringing him up, out of nowhere, in an obama or mccain thread. Ron Paul is over with, he lost the primary, he's not running for president.

reply to post by bknapple32


Well I did have something to say....but then I read your whole post. I wasnt a close follower of Ron paul but heard a lot of good stuff about him. Anyone who wishes him to be president will have to wait another 4 more years. The only real sane choice for me is Obama.

You may have stirred up a hornets nest with this post...lol.

I could sit and find issues that i didn't agree with on both Major candidates and what their vote was on it. I'd never completely agree with anyone as we all have our own minds and opinions.

Second, people have every right to bring the man up in threads. Our government is corrupt and full of greed.

Suppression of everyone accept the ones in the major parties is completely unfair. I don't think REAL change will come from either major political party. It's either going to come from a Third Party, Independent, or a MAJOR reform of REP/DEM party.

So let me get this straight. You're sick of people having an opinion that differs from yours?

This reminds me of something McCain said at the last debate. He stated that Joe Bidden was "wrong" on a lot of foreign policies. Then, as an example, he used Bidden's vote against the war.

So, if someone has a different stance on an issue, it's unoquivically wrong? How short sighted is that?

he's wrong on abortion because you don't agree.

he's wrong on the flag burning ban because... well, it's ammunition for you. Now, I'm not advocating the burning of the flag, but the right to do so. The flag itself stands for the right to burn it.

He's wrong about the... wait a minute. I'm not even going to touch the Patriot Act. Do yourself a favor and read it.

In fact, I don't have to go any further at all. Compare his voting record with the Constitution, and read a little more of these bills than their titles.

Originally posted by bknapple32
Again, another thread moved by maria stardust. How does this not fall under a presidential platform? It shows Ron Paul's platform in black and white. He has supported Chuck Baldwin for president. Thus it is relevant.

As we continue discussion, Im filing a complaint on this one. Too many threads moved by Maria Stardust to forums that are dead. Trying to shut up the thread without actually doing it.

You might have a point if he was running for president. However, he's not. Therefore, it seems this thread's main intent is to take a shot at those that supported him, and nothing else.

I am quite sick of the whole charade of Obama and McCain.We do not have a choice in this country it is all a horse and poney show.I realise to those who do not understand Ron Paul it appears he is a wacko.They nicknamed him "Dr.Know" for a reason and those reasons are "unknown" to manny.So sad and to bad for us all.

Yet, unit you ignore the many other bills that he voted agianst. I included those as not to show that I was hiding anything. Those were merely to show some paul supporters that they may have huge issues with him they didn't know about. You did not address the amber alert, shocking. you did not address the aids bill, shocking. you did not address the Condemning Iraq Abuse of Prisoners Resolution, shocking.


Im not saying that people shouldnt support him because I dont, but I doubt they agree with him on many issues that they may or may not know about. The AMBER alert being an issue that should be at the heart of every parent.

reply to post by bknapple32


You're right. Ron isn't perfect. But I do strongly feel he was one of our best hopes for giving the country back to the people. The thought of having Obama as president terrifies me. The thought of having McCain as president also now terrifies me although I had planned to vote for him previously.

Ron Paul is not a messiah but at least he was willing to fight for Americans instead of exploiting them. The only way for ANY of us to completely agree with 100% of a candidate's issues is for us to be that candidate. Other than that, we will all have things we disagree with- even with our favorite picks.

I will say this, though, to be honest- I didn't know he voted against the unborn victim's act. That truly makes me sick and does make me like him less. I know he supports smaller government and less laws but that one is definitely a law I believe in and one that should bring severe punishment when broken.

[edit on 10/18/2008 by AshleyD]

double post

[edit on 18-10-2008 by bknapple32]

reply to post by AshleyD


Thats all I wanted ashley. Support him, im not agianst that. I just wanted to bring to light some of the issues that seem 'out there' on him

When this country was founded, the idea that the founder had was for the Federal Gov. to pretty much stay out of things that should be state's rights.

The founders believed that it was NOT the Fed. Gov.'s job to police the country, making laws that affect all the states, and the residents of those states.

We have ventured so far away from our founding father's dream for this country, it is amazing.

When a candidate comes along that still believes in the ideal that our founding fathers set out to create, he is lambasted. People would rather have someone who is for the idea that the Fed. Gov. is supposed to make all our decisions for us, and regulate us, and control us.

When you look at ANY candidate's voting record. Look at the bill, was it taking more of the state's rights away? or was it making sure that the states kept their rights? Then decide if the candidate understands the ideals that our Constitution was made to create.

after you do that homework, then decide how you will vote

reply to post by bknapple32


I guess you can support cowards, liars, and crooks all you want to. I'm sticking to my guns. I know that the reason he doesn't vote for some things, even though in his own words "he would like to" it's not his business or the business of the federal government. He is a true constitutionalist and I respect him for that. He's not one of these fairweather politicians who'll hop, skip, and jump to a bill that fits their personal ideologies.

He is a true representative of the people, with his only limitations extending as far as the Constitution permits him to. Politicians think as soon as they're elected into a position of power, they have free reign on what "they" feel is right. 99% of politicians think because they were an elected representative of the people, they have free reign on what they find is "right." It is not.

Abide by the constitution.
Abide by your people.
Abide by your elective powers.

You can be pissed at us for comparing Paul's honesty with the lack of McCain and Obama's, but that is exactly what these two men expect of you, as we expect the same from them. A proverbial Bill O'Reilly's "They should just shut up!"

NO.

You can defend liars, but I will fight them, along with my people, and the man I will write in for president.


And BK, personally.. I hope you're satisfied with yourself and your defense of these men after they finish the job that was started in 1913.


Good job, dude.

reply to post by redhatty


sir, i did my homework. hence i brought these issues to light. And the founding fathers did not have a whole continent to work with. including hawaii and alaska. Sorry, that doesnt work. Anyone against the amber alert puts states rights over their child.

reply to post by bknapple32


Personally, I'm tired of people who bash people without understanding what they're bashing. You list a number of votes that ron Paul voted against. Did you stop to ask yourself WHY he voted against those bills? Are you suggesting that DR Paul is aginast AIDS assistance? Against Amber Alerts? In favor of SPAM? Are you truly THAT ignorant?

Ron Paul is a strict Constitutionalist. As such, he votes against any bill that is outside of the Cosntitutionally prescribed powers of the Federal government. In addition, these bills undoubtedly carried clauses that are unrelated to the 'subject' of the bill. The VAST majority do.

For example, you could submit the "Equal Rights for Economically disadvantaged, Handicapped Children" bill. But that bill could have a "funding to nuke Holland" clause added. So, unless you hate Holland any SANE person would vote against the bill. And then some maroon would come along and say, "He voted against the "Equal Rights for Economically disadvantaged, Handicapped Children" bill. Get it?

Most RP supporters had to have done their homework on the issues to even know they support him. We surely didn't hear much about his stands from the MSM. While I did find his positions dissappointing on on some issues, I placed more urgency and importance on the issues that I agreed with him on.

If I decide to post about Paul in a thread concerning Obama or McCain, it would be to use him as a reference for what these candidates don't bring to the table. We know that he is no longer running, but that doesn't change our lack of trust for the two main candidates.

Political ideology should be completely free to speak about in any way that it pertains to the topic of the thread. We should think critically, learning all view points, rather than restate what has been said over and over by the media.

reply to post by jtma508


Its fun to attack by saying I didnt understand or do my homework. But if you read my post above, I obviously understood that he was a constitutionalist. I said


If you are against the AMBER alert, you are putting STATES rights over you child.

I get it, he believes in states rights strictly as to limit the powers of the federal gov. but im sorry, issues like the amber alert shows that mr paul is an extremist, and those are bad. Left, right, or whatever. Extremism is bad.

reply to post by bknapple32


No, you're not. You're making states responsible for the people that live within it's borders. The states can set those things up. The reason why the federal government has so much control is because of us going to them for help. State to state cooperation can be achieved without intervention from the federal government. The state governments are absolutely capable of paying for and operating an Amber Alert system without the incredible spending that comes with anything federalized.

Originally posted by bknapple32
Again, another thread moved by maria stardust. How does this not fall under a presidential platform? It shows Ron Paul's platform in black and white. He has supported Chuck Baldwin for president. Thus it is relevant.

As we continue discussion, Im filing a complaint on this one. Too many threads moved by Maria Stardust to forums that are dead. Trying to shut up the thread without actually doing it.

bknapple32, I have added you as one of my friends and respect a lot of your views here on ATS. I was a Ron Paul supporter and still is but the fact for me is, he dropped out and Obama is the only choice for me. America will be changed at the end of this financial crisis. My opinion is that it will hit rock bottom and then start up fresh again. We need a leader like Obama to carry us into this new era we are entering.

Now, about this Maria Stardust person. Yesterday I posted a thread asking simple questions to the republicans on this board and here she comes moving my thread to trash and not only that removing my avatar (a picture of Hilary, Obama, Biden and Michelle in a car dancing). Its abuse of power like this I cannot understand.

I actually believe that the Amber alerts would be better managed on a state by state level. Each state would be able to allocate any specific amount in budget that it deems necessary to cope with the level of missing children it has in a year. Each Amber alert would be much more locallized (saying child last seen in the Greenspoint area is much more helpful than child last seen in Houston). If there was any chance that the child would be taken across state borders there would be less confusion between those states than if people in Michigan are looking for a child believed to be taken to Arkansas.

This is just one example of how you cannot look at a voting record alone and choose a candidate. Research why the candidates voted the way they did. Understand what reasons they had before deciding that this person must hate children!