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

OP. If you don't like us bashing other candidates then to bad.

We are not concerned with your feelings or the feelings of the other candidates.

You can sit there and point out every bill Ron Paul voted no on and it makes no difference to people who support Ron Paul for one simple reason. That reason is, Ron Paul is a constitutionalist, which means he will only vote yes on a bill if it is expressly allowed by the constitution.

To me this is a brave thing to do. No matter how much good is intended by all these bills, they all fail to meet the requirements set by the constitution as to what the power and role of government should be.

If you don't like that, then you really need to do some research on the reasons the Constitution of the United States is written the way it was. Look at the Declaration of independence and the charges against King George of England.

Maybe then you will realize why it is so important to defend the Constitution.

To me, anyone who does not defend the Constitution is un American. I personally have dissolved friendships with people I have known for years because they are not defenders of the Constitution. It means so much to me, I was willing to fight and die for it, and I served my country and swore to defend it.

Ron Paul is the Champion of the Constitution.

reply to post by bknapple32

Ah, now you know the truth, that they're all the same, Paul, Obama, McCain all have supporters that like to bash people.
So much for changing america for the better eh.
If Paul supporter behave the same way that Obama's and McCain's have, then they're no better than the other two.

Posting single issue "bills" and then targeting someone's voting record is one of the most dishonest tactics in politics. In each and every case you've listed the bills were used to tack on unrelated legislation. The reason so many people respect Ron Paul is because he has the moral character to vote against a bill should an item be added to it which he disagrees with.

Most politicians vote for bills in order to use that vote in a campaign. The real day to day work they care about are the hidden items added to each and every bill. This is where the appropriations and unfunded spending are implemented in the dark. Most of your politicians are only too happy to pass a bad set of laws if their pet pork barrel project can benefit. It's no coincidence that almost all bribery and corruption cases trace back to the passing of appropriations and special funding to benefit campaign contributors.

McCain sold out in order to secure the nomination and Obama hasn't had the experience to even be compared to Paul in the same breath.

Those of us who supported Paul will be the ones saying "I told you so" in the near future, get used to it. You're all going to get exactly what corporate America has paid for, politicians who will continue the agenda Bush Jr has worked so hard for.

Out of McCain, Obama and Paul, who voted against the Patriot Act? Only Paul

He's exactly the type of leader people in the country claim we need but because he doesn't serve the right or left agenda and jump up and down about each parties pet issues he's not only ignored but he's made into some sort of villain. Only in modern America would a politician who truly represents the people and honors his oath to uphold the constitution be ignored in favor for the very worst the two party control system can offer. Americans need to start making some intelligent choices or there won't be an America left to be stupid in.

McCain + Obama = CFR, AIPAC, and many more

Ron Paul = Honest.

Enough said.

Allow me to go through your points one by one......



1. Ron Paul voted against the prohibition of cloning.

Ron Paul is a strict Constitutionalist. his vote here wold stand to reason as this is an issue that should be dealt with on the State level as described in the Constitution.

2. 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.

Again...an issue that should be dealt with at the state level, not federally.

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

People have the right to express themselves however the see fit. If burning a flag is how you choose to express yourself, so be it. That being said... each state has the right to make a law that bans it, it should not be done on a Federal Level.

4. He voted against the Anti Terrorism Act of 2001.

A piece of legislation that also violated and wiped out several aspects of the Bill of Rights. I thank god he was smart enough to see and vote against it.

4. He voted against the Same Sex Marriage Resolution.

Ron Paul is a Conservative... so with that in mind, why would you be shocked by this vote? Also... again... same sex marriage should be dealt with at the State level, not decided by Big Brother.

5. He voted against the AIDS Assistance Bill.

Without reading the actual bill I reserve the right to not say much on this. I could speculate all day long about why, but without reading the bill or having any real idea of what it contained, I refuse to do so.

6. He voted against a nationwide AMBER alert system.

Good!! Do you have any idea how this system has been abused?? It sure looks good on paper, and the idea behind it is wonderful! I also have seen how this system has been abused. just two months ago an Amber Alert went out on a 4 year old girl. The suspect?? The Father who refused to let doctors keep his daughter in a hospital when she was not in need of medical attention!

7. He voted against the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act.

Again ...a state level issue

8. He voted against the Condemning Iraq Abuse of Prisoners Resolution.

Which would be the only sane thing to do if you voted against the war. If you believe it is an illegal occupation and there should be no war to begin with... then you would not see these people as "Prisoners" what they actually are is "kidnapped"

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

This one I would have to read up on as I do not have any idea what was contained within the bill. I could easily assume that it is a situation where again...it can be dealt with on a State level and I think it should be!!

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

Honestly I can understand this. First off I should not have to beg anyone to not call me. The real issue here should be how your information is getting out there so other people CAN call you!

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

This one is a slippery slope. The "War on Drugs" takes up millions upon millions of dollars per year and accomplishes NOTHING!!! We have failed to keep drugs out of this country. No matter how tough the laws get... drugs are still easily accessible to anyone who desires to find it. I would call that a complete waste of money.

As far as Marijuana... I also believe it should be legalized. There are far too many people in prison who didn't hurt anyone. Instead they got high. There are people who will sit in prison for decades, but we let child molesters out of jail early because we need the room for more people who did not hing but get high. They didn't hurt someone, they didn't molest anyone, they didn't kill anyone. Instead they got high which didn't hurt anyone but themselves (which is also very debatable).

Once you realize that under the Constitution the Federal Government is supposed to be limited in it's power and the majority of laws should be coming from the State level, it stands to reason why Dr. Paul votes as he does.

Originally posted by MrWendal
Ron Paul voted .....

Key phrase ... he VOTED ... whereas Obama said 'present' a whole lot.

Ron Paul says what he means and means what he says.

ok i get it. ron paul is perfect. nothing more needs to be said.

I have to agree with the OP on the nationwide Amber Alert. It is not only a good use of national resources, but it makes good common sense. Parents should not need to have to move to a state to protect their children because it supports Amber Alerts. The safety and security of our children is a societal duty, not a state issue.

While there is a good argument for state's rights, there never has been and never will be a 100% seperation of states and federal duties. Overlap is sometimes necesary.

Otoh, RP supporters have every right to vet the other candidates as much as they want.

reply to post by robwerden


im not saying that i dont mind bashing the candidates. im talking about the interjecting of threads devoted to just mccain or obama with something of ron paul.

[edit on 19-10-2008 by bknapple32]

sweet! A Ron Paul forum!! I have tried very hard posting in any political forum not to 'bash' the other side.. I think I have done pretty good. I think I have even taken a side or defended against outrageous claims a few times..

I would like to expand upon your issue #2, or was it 3.. That he voted against the Bill to save babies born alive during abortions.

First, Obama also voted against this bill (just for the record), and is a big reason I lean his way on several issues because he HAS studied the Constitution and is able to look objectively at issues before 'going with the crowd' and voting.

This is an issue close to me personally because I am a Paramedic. Just as I am sure it close to Dr. Paul.

Doctors have the Hippocratic oath, I have a duty to act. To pass that bill would be saying that those things are not enough. If I'm out eating at a restaurant and someone has a heart attack, or if I'm driving in my car and see a wreck. I don't need another law passed that tells me to help that person.

Ron Paul is Pro-Life, I think that issue alone would be enough for him to be found 'unpopular' by a lot of people. I don't think its right to insinuate, (especially by the McCain camp about Obama) that he is any way against saving the life of a baby.

Okay, I was wrong! I can admit it to!

I'm looking for the Bill that Obama voted no on, and how Ron Paul voted on it. I was confusing the two here, if I can't find it tho then I will have to admonish the Obama campaign for scewing their interpretation and myself for not looking it up better!

As for the one you are talking about, here is Ron Pauls opinion:

However, Congress does more damage than just expanding the class to whom Federal murder and assault statutes apply--it further entrenches and seemingly concurs with the Roe v. Wade decision (the Court's intrusion into rights of States and their previous attempts to protect by criminal statute the unborn's right not to be aggressed against). By specifically exempting from prosecution both abortionists and the mothers of the unborn (as is the case with this legislation), Congress appears to say that protection of the unborn child is not only a Federal matter but conditioned upon motive. In fact, the Judiciary Committee in marking up the bill, took an odd legal turn by making the assault on the unborn a strict liability offense insofar as the bill does not even require knowledge on the part of the aggressor that the unborn child exists

entire statement

I would have edited the previous post, but I don't believe in covering up my own blunders either.. I just learn from them (I learn a lot sometimes! lol).

[edit on 10/20/2008 by toepick]

Okay, I think I got this straight. And I'm sorry for the multiple posts:

This was kinda hard to track down, because the parts of this concerning Obama actually took place in Illinois, not US congress.

The "Born Alive Infant" legislation attempts in IL started in 2001, then again in 2003 and finally was passed in 2005. It appears the controversy surrounds rewording the law and how it applies to abortion rights. The final version passing unanimously (except for 4 'present' voters).

History of IL Born-Alive Legislation
IL General Assembly HB0498
Letter from Rick Winkel(R) - Bill Co-Sponser

Obama states he voted no because Doctors are already legally obligated to act so it was not necessary. The final version did have this line added it it:

(e) Nothing in this Section shall be construed to alter generally accepted medical standards.

Which was not in the original, nor is it in the Federal Born-Alive Infant Act.

So that very well supports his claim.

Obviously since this all took place in IL, Ron Paul had nothing to do with it, so I hear-by eat my words.

Originally posted by bknapple32
im not saying that i dont mind bashing the candidates. im talking about the interjecting of threads devoted to just mccain or obama with something of ron paul.

You misunderstand the purpose of ATS and free debate. What are you saying? No one should interject comments about Obama in a topic devoted to McCain? No one should interject comments about McCain in a topic devoted to Obama? Or is it just mentioning Ron Paul that sickens you?

McCain and Obama promise change but talk in platitudes and generalities. Ron Paul has made his intentions on troops in Iraq and the Federal Reserve quite clear. Interrupting the MCCain/Obama false dichotomy with a blast of Ron Paul is our constitutional duty!

reply to post by bknapple32


Thanks for the thread, I was not aware of Ron Paul's "controversial" votes against some of the legislation presented here. So, I decided to go digging. The most viable course of action was to head to Ron Paul's House site for speeches and statements in regards to the list you presented.

Congressman Ron Paul Speeches and Statements

Most of his opinions and stances can be found there, along with the reasons he voted the way he did.

However, in some cases it was necessary to dig into the Congressional Record (which is something I only do when I have a Newcastle handy).

For example, regarding his vote against the legislation nationalizing the AMBER alert system...

"However, Mr. Speaker, I am concerned that making the AMBER Alert system a Federal program is neither constitutionally sound nor effective law enforcement. All Americans should be impressed at the demonstrated effectiveness of the AMBER system in locating missing and kidnapped children. However, I would ask my colleagues to consider that one of the factors that makes the current AMBER system so effective is that the AMBER Alert system is not a Federal program."

March 20, 2003 - Congressional Record E529
March 20, 2003 - Congressional Record E530

The real question is whether or not you agree with Ron Paul's voting record AFTER you read the reasons he gives. That goes for any of the candidates running for any office. In my opinion, Ron Paul takes his constitutional oath very seriously and in these days of craziness, we need more elected officials to do so.

reply to post by Lurkerzrule

However, in some cases it was necessary to dig into the Congressional Record (which is something I only do when I have a Newcastle handy).

amen to that

reply to post by beammeup


That would Dr. No . Because he refuses to support any vote that is contrary to the constitution.

Paul is the man. Iam still not sure if I will write him in, or vote for Baldwin just because he endorsed him.

Originally posted by bknapple32
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....


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.

I find it absolutely amazing that for all of the disagreements between the both of us over many Political issues, from time to time there is an issue which we actually find ourselves agreeing upon. THIS is ABSOLUTELY one of those expressed issues wherein I am in full agreement with you. I hear so many American's ONLINE tout Ron Paul as if he is the end all be all of Political Candidates in America. I have heard some good ideas and such put forth by Rep. Paul, but by in all he remains extremely naive as to what his dramatic ideals truly entail.

The reason so many Young Voters find Ron Paul so appealing, is that his claims are so extravagantly wondrous in nature. Most individuals without Government experience or knowledge have no idea however, how such claims would actually serve to disrupt and quite possibly crumble portions of the American system. It is similar to a stunning Written Theory, which when tested in reality leads towards no suitable Application.

Originally posted by bknapple32
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.

Couldn't a nationwide Amber Alert system have been organized as a non-profit? Why does the government have to do it? Why do you see the government as the savior for everything?

I appreciate that Ron Paul is a constitutionalist. He is the closest thing to a Founding Father, that we have in Washington.

I believe that upholding the constitution is the only way to unite this country. I attended the Rally for the Republic back in September, for the kick off to the Campaign for Liberty. One of the things that really struck me at the rally was the diversity of the people. There were 80 year old couples dressed in their Sunday clothes and 20-somethings in ripped up jeans with piercings all over their face. There were black, white, muslim, oriental, etc. It was truly a melting pot of Americans - some very conservative and some very liberal, but we were all brought together in unity by the topic of liberty and preserving the constitution. Liberty unites. Party politics divides. I truly believe that Ron Paul was our one chance for a united nation. Given the dire circumstances in the world right now, we can't afford to be a divided nation. We must be Americans before we are Democrats or Republicans or whatever else.

With Obama and McCain, all I see is party politics. I don't see any real discussion of what we're facing in this world. It looks no more serious than a football game. The state of our nation is more important than a football game. We need to wake up as a nation and remember that we're all Americans, so we truly should all be on the same team? Why do we act like we're enemies?

reply to post by Ron Paul Girl


Well that nationwide amber alert saved a little boy last week here in Vegas. So again, mr paul is wrong