Ron Paul's legislative successes (or rather lack of successes)

page: 2
20
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 01:19 AM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


He explained a lot of times why he's going for pork. It's because the money is gonna be spent. Pork only says where and how the money is gonna be spent. So might as well be his district instead of being ``general money`` which end up funding stupid things.




posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 01:20 AM
link   
he used my obama and bush comment (that i directly responding to his post with) in a post about members derailing.


someones not reading properly or something.



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 01:21 AM
link   
reply to post by TupacShakur
 


Ron Paul doesn't get to decide what is and what isn't Constitutional...that is the job of the SCOTUS.

So you can claim he is the "only" one that follows the Constitution...but that is just your own personal opinion...it is no more valid than anyone elses opinion of who they support and think is right for the country.

Ron Paul can vote "no" against every single bill...but his peers obviously don't agree with him on much...so please don't act like he is stopping anything all by himself. If he stops anything...he is just going along with the Republicans that have already decided to stop it. Don't try to pretend that it is Ron Paul leading the charge...that is just living in a fantasy world.



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 01:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vitchilo
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


He explained a lot of times why he's going for pork. It's because the money is gonna be spent. Pork only says where and how the money is gonna be spent. So might as well be his district instead of being ``general money`` which end up funding stupid things.


just in case you get the wrong idea outkast searcher... this response to your comment is a DIRECT response not a derailing response. just because you dont agree with it doesnt mean its derailing your post.



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 01:26 AM
link   
reply to post by eLPresidente
 



Don't get mad because you started a thread trying to make Ron Paul look bad and failed.


I'm not trying to make him look bad...he is doing that fine all by himself.

One bill in 14 years...you can act like he has done a good job all you want...but deep down you know it's not true.

His ideas do not align with the majority of the American people...that is why his ideas don't get passed...not because every other congressmen is corrupt.


The way you are bolding and enlarging font just shows how badly you want to derail this thread to focus on anything else besides Ron Paul's complete failure in congress....OH...except for introductin Pork into bills for his own pet projects.

I wonder how you feel about other congressmen filling bills with Pork for their own pet projects???



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 01:26 AM
link   




Excellent post

Now if people actually cared about substance and not superficial things like having a 100% success rate with passing legislation that destroy the principles of this country...oh...wait...



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 01:27 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 01:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Vitchilo
 


So Pork is ok when Ron Paul does it...but not when anyone else does???

Or are you Ron Paul supporters a big fan of adding Pork into bills??? That is something new...I would have guessed that is something you would accuse "corrupt" politicians of doing.



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 01:31 AM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 



His ideas do not align with the majority of the American people...that is why his ideas don't get passed...not because every other congressmen is corrupt.

Since when do the people decide which bills get passed? Wait until after the election before claiming he doesn't represent the majority.



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 01:32 AM
link   
reply to post by eLPresidente
 


Yeah, he really needs to boost his image. Grossly unconstitutional legislation seems to be the "in thing" with our government right now. Maybe if he sponsored something that allowed the government to spy on all forms of communication in direct violation of the 4th Amendment, his success rate would go up. No that's already been done.

How about if he sponsored a bill which allowed people to get tortured in violation of the 8th Amendment? Oh wait that's taken too. What about a bill that allows the military to act as a police force on American soil, and indefinitely detain American citizens without a charge or trial, in violation of the 5th, 6th, and 7th Amendment? Ah that's already been passed!

What else is there? I'm sure quartering soldiers could pass with flying colors if he simply named the bill "The True American Act". Wait, I'm not the Supreme Court, I guess my opinion on Constitutionality is irrelevant anyway.



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 01:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Planet teleX
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 



His ideas do not align with the majority of the American people...that is why his ideas don't get passed...not because every other congressmen is corrupt.

Since when do the people decide which bills get passed? Wait until after the election before claiming he doesn't represent the majority.


People elected congressmen who represent their views and ideas...those congressmen do not work with Ron Paul at all to help get any of his ideas passed.

It's simple logic...it's really not that hard to figure out.



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 01:34 AM
link   
reply to post by TupacShakur
 


Maybe Ron Paul should've thought of the Patriot Act, SOPA, PIPA, and NDAA too, Those would look great on his bill passing record.



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 01:37 AM
link   
reply to post by TupacShakur
 



I guess my opinion on Constitutionality is irrelevant anyway.


Yes, your opinion is irrelevant...as is mine...as is everyones who isn't a federal judge...and ultimately everyone who isn't on the SCOTUS.

If you think otherwise...then you are in for big dissapointments in your life.



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 01:40 AM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 



Ron Paul doesn't get to decide what is and what isn't Constitutional...that is the job of the SCOTUS.
Then where the hell were they when things like the Patriot Act were getting passed? What's the Supreme Court doing while peoples genitals are being grabbed by the TSA at airports? Picking their noses and wiping the boogers on the Constitution that they're supposed to be upholding?



So you can claim he is the "only" one that follows the Constitution...but that is just your own personal opinion...it is no more valid than anyone elses opinion of who they support and think is right for the country.
Find me one vote he's taken that's unconstitutional, then try to find another congressman that stacks up. I think everybody can agree that nobody comes close to him in that field.


Ron Paul can vote "no" against every single bill...but his peers obviously don't agree with him on much...so please don't act like he is stopping anything all by himself.
I never said that. At least he's sticking to his Constitutional guns even when it's not trendy.


If he stops anything...he is just going along with the Republicans that have already decided to stop it. Don't try to pretend that it is Ron Paul leading the charge...that is just living in a fantasy world.
He is leading the charge towards freedom and a Constitutional government. Even if he doesn't get elected, the message will remain and the people will have been awoken by his words of wisdom in a sea of ignorance.
edit on 27-12-2011 by TupacShakur because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 01:43 AM
link   
reply to post by eLPresidente
 


For real dude. The Founding Fathers didn't really care about elected officials actually following the Constitution, they were more interested in them being popular, regardless of whether they're abiding by that document during their successful glory.



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 01:45 AM
link   
Only one Bill of his was ever passed in 14 years????

I suppose it wasn't his duty to create Bills that contained his flawless intellectual wisdoms for the benefit of his Country or to flex his indomitable influential prowess to garner support to pass those Bills so the Constitutional justice which only he can interpret could flow forth from the bowels of Congress. He must have been saving himself for when he gets to be President, ya that's it.....perfect Paul fanatical logic.

I didn't realize he had such a FAIL record. It's almost flawless except for that one darn chunk of land he managed to get donated.
edit on 27-12-2011 by TinfoilTP because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 01:46 AM
link   
ahhh, the ridiculous notion that passing bills = successful congressman.

Never mind the Constitution, never mind the oath of office, never mind serving and protecting the people.

No, we expect them to pass bills no matter what is written, no matter how unconstitutional. Because THAT makes a successful congressman. THATS the reason why politicians want to leave office with a LEGACY. (OBAMA CARE)



Outkast, I can see your high priority for the lack of substance now. No wonder you support Obama........
edit on 27-12-2011 by eLPresidente because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 01:50 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 01:51 AM
link   
reply to post by TupacShakur
 


You are once again using your own personal opinion (or Ron Paul's personal opinion) to decide what is and what isn't Constitutional.

I leave that up to the SCOTUS...you know...because the Constitution grants them that authority.

Maybe YOU should follow the Constitution and allow the SCOTUS to decide if something is unconstitutional and not have Ron Paul decide for you



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 01:55 AM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


The SCOTUS is a bunch of misfit, incompetent jerk-offs as far as I'm concerned. The Patriot Act, TSA, and NDAA should have been rejected on day one by them. What are they doing? Where are they? Why are they not challenging these things?

I can read and analyze the Bill of Rights perfectly well myself, and it doesn't take 9 brains to tell us that the Patriot Act, TSA, and NDAA are unconstitutional.

Feel free to stand by the Supreme Court until the end though. As long as they don't say "Hey, that's the Constitution they're shredding there buddy!", you can go ahead and support whatever unconstitutional legislation is thrown at you, simply because the Supreme Court, which at this point evidently is not functioning properly, doesn't point out the obvious.

Kooky old Ron and his delusions of understanding basic concepts like due process of law and protections against unreasonable search and seizure will continue to make himself look like the goofball he is by voting no on things that the Supreme Court hasn't given him permission to declare unconstitutional.
edit on 27-12-2011 by TupacShakur because: (no reason given)





top topics
 
20
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join