Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'National Laws, Bills and Politics' started by Malum Prohibitum, Jan 12, 2007.
For those of you who do not know: http://www.house.gov/paul/
and from http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2006/tst062606.htm
I bet letters to Rep. Paul do not get return emails stating his supposed "strong support for the Second Amendment" generally without any concrete details on what that means.
From a speech on the House floor:
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congr ... 100404.htm
I hope he does run. If he does, he has my vote.
Get on his email list "Freedom Watch."
He emails once a week and it is very informative.
Running as a Republican?!
Why has he joined that party of Traitors?
He did it for a good reason. He is far more likely to get votes if he runs as a republican than a libertarian. The majority of voters (particularly those that would vote republican) think that Libertarians are just a bunch of dope smoking hippies who want to let all the illegals in.
The brilliant Milton Friedman once said: "I am a libertarian with a small l and a Republican with a capital R. And I am a Republican with a capital R on grounds of expediency, not on principle."
I believe that Paul would agree with that statement.
Ron Paul states: Jan 15th 2007
"Meanwhile, US troops stormed the Iranian consulate in Iraq and detained several Iranian diplomats. Taken together, the message was clear: the administration intends to move the US closer to a dangerous and ill-advised conflict with Iran."
He tells it like it is.
Foul, where have you been for the last three decades while he was a Republican Congressman?
The answer is simple - he could not get elected as a Libertarian, just like nobody else gets elected as a libertarian.
If they were smart, more of them would run as Republicans.
P.S. Like me, Ron Paul is pro-life, which gets him shafted by the Libertarians, who do not have a lot of tolerance for anybody who fails to adhere to the party line on even one issue.
There is more room for differing views within one of the two major parties, and a flood of Libertarians could influence the party platform in a beneficial way, perhaps even pulling the Republicans back from their slide into socialism.
Puking in the toilet due to him turning coat.
Whatdya care what his party name is so long as he represents your views? Would you vote for a Democrat that wanted to repeal the income tax and all gun control laws? And dismantle social security and other welfare programs?
I would rather NOT vote for either a Democrat OR Republican, both of whom have a sordid history of raping the Constitution, stealing my rights and spending me and my children into early graves.
I've voted for people in the past that did not do what they promised. How are they different?.....they're not.
Yep, I now view people on what they have actually done, not on what they say.
If they claim they did not understand something... well that is what they have staff for. READ.
If both have no history and one claims to be pro-gun and the other claims nothing, then the pro-gun person will be ahead only slightly.
Ron Paul has a history, and it does not consist of earmarks, gun control, or the exercise of power not granted to the government in the Constitution.
He votes "no" on Republican bloated budgets.
Which is why he is the only person I have heard of that is interested in running, that I would be interested in voting for.
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/article ... shtml?s=lh
+1 I totally agree, and would love to see him get the Republican nomination and win.
A thread on his most recent bill:
http://www.georgiapacking.org/forum/vie ... ce847f3bb4
I'll have to scrub my hands with Brillo pads and sulphuric acid afterwards, but I might just have to vote for a Republican this time around...