What I am going to do is ask you if this is how you really see things or have you just not researched the man and his positions? Do you really think Ron Paul wants to cut education? Do you really think he would endorse regulating abortion?
Little trickles of misunderstanding start here on ATS, if you stick around long enough you can watch them blossom into deformed flowers. I am left wondering if the gardeners have a final goal in mind or are just careless with their gardens.
Your link provides NO context and no explanation for Ron Paul's votes. You should know, as an informed voter, that a bill's title is more times than not, very misleading. Just because a bill is called "Happy Glittery Unicorn Initiative 2011" does not mean it's all about happy, glittery unicorns. There very well could be language written in the bill that allows happy, glittery unicorns who are no longer fit to work be made into dog food. Some might consider this a bad thing and vote against this bill in it's entirely (You can challenge portions of a bill in court, but as the bill is being passed it's an "all or nothing" situation.)
There is a reason for each vote Ron Paul has made - if you see something like "Civil Rights" and someone tells you Ron Paul voted against it, you should find out WHY. In this instance it's not because Ron Paul scoffs at the idea of civil rights, it's because the rights granted in the bill to some people would alienate or dissolve the rights of others. It's not always easy being a moderator, and sometimes you have to make principled decisions that others won't understand.
You're responsibility, as a voter, is to inform yourself. Reading blogs that take a candidate's position out of context and intentionally hide relevant information from you aren't helping you meet this criteria.
edit on 2-1-2012 by TinkerHaus because: (no reason given)
