Ron Paul makes good showing on CNN today

Status
Not open for further replies.
toybox
Now I get it
only the smart people ( 1 in 5 voters) can understand the value of Ron Paul being in politics.
Click to expand...

Yeah, well, I will say that those 1 in 5 voters are certainly more conservative than a typical John McCain supporter. McCain appeals to liberals and moderates, not to the Conservative base of the GOP.
 
well if McCain thinks he is going to win. He is just mooching for every penny right now. I mean he has already gone over spending limits
Click to expand...

He knows the current Justice Department will just ignore it. As long as he doesn't kill somebody (literally) he's probably got a free pass.
 
Ron Paul's a nut and he isn't going anywhere politically beyond his current station in life. Sorry that chafs so many of your hides, but it's not changing.
 
stiofan
Ron Paul's a nut...
Click to expand...

Is that all you can add to this conversation.... you call Congressman Paul a derogatory name? My God, you would make a perfect democrat... Dems are excellent at the tactic of name calling to distract from how little they know about the issues.
 
Good showing? Isn't endorsing Obama over McCain and stating he supports "somebody who will uphold the constitution" a blatant contradiction? Obama is a nobody socialist who was created by the media. Paul must have missed the part of Obama that supports a nanny state, wants to give more of our money to foreign countries, and views the 2A as something dependent on where one lives. Yeah... great showing. :rolleyes:
 
LAK Supply
Isn't endorsing Obama over McCain.....
Click to expand...

Who did that? Did you watch the same video that I did because Congressman Paul positively did not endorse Obama. Anyone who says differently should provide the forum community with proof of what they are saying or else I call BS.
 
Out of context? Paul voted against the PLCAA, that's all that's important to know if, like me, you spent time and money lobbying for its passage.

So McCain didn't support one of Ron Paul's looney bills
Click to expand...

Out of context in the sense that you act as if that is the only gun related action in Paul's 20 years in Congress. Actually, it is the only one which can possibly be misinterpreted as anti-gun. I think Paul was wrong on the commerce clause in that vote, and agree with Dave Kopel that the PLCAA was quite possibly the only correct application of the commerce clause in recent memory, but I'm not going to try to lie to people and say that Paul voted the way he did because he is anti-gun. He voted the way he did because he dislikes federal interference in state tort laws.

If I were trying to propagate such a lie, I would at least try to find one other example of his "anti-gun" behavior.

What is looney about proposing the repeal of federal firearms laws? I think it's a good idea.

Back in the 1980's, I remember people telling me to stop supporting looney libertarian ideas like privatizing Socialist Security. Fortunately, some of us just don't listen when an idea we know is good is called looney. Now the idea has become so acceptable that we might live to see at least partial control of our own retirement planning. The same thing happened with school vouchers, another formerly looney libertarian idea. I think these changes are good.

The same thing can happen to federal firearms laws, and you can help. Instead of calling a good idea "looney" why not just tone it down one notch and call it a good idea that is unrealistic at this time?

Now for some context when comparing McCain and Paul:

McCain wants to end private, unregulated gun transactions in America. We all know the so-called "gun show loophole" he wants to close is really a "private sale loophole" which will quickly escape the confines of gun shows. It seems like he has the same respect for individual gun rights as he does for individual rights to political expression: he thinks it's OK as long as government is watching over those pesky individuals, but real individual freedom is not OK with John McCain. Paul thinks the feds should butt out of gun shows.

McCain also wants only rich and politically connected people to have guns, just like he wants only rich and politically connected people to be able to talk about politicians before an election. Banning cheap handguns is not a good idea if you need a handgun and can't afford an expensive one. Paul thinks the price of your handgun should be an individual decision, not a federal one.

McCain also loves trigger locks, and says he is intrigued by "smart guns" which (unless their technology fails at the wrong moment) will only allow the owner to fire the gun. Paul again thinks such things should be at the discretion of individuals.

McCain said he was open to voting for an assault weapon ban, depending on the details.
Source: Los Angeles Times, “McCain Calls for Hearings” Aug 17, 1999

Ron Paul was never open to voting for any mean-looking weapons ban, regardless of details.
 
Out of context in the sense that you act as if that is the only gun related action in Paul's 20 years in Congress.
Click to expand...

Can you name a single significant pro-gun Bill Ron Paul has authored that has been enacted into law over his 20 year career?

Didn't think so.

And...now that were back to Ron Paul here in May 2008 and have the benefit of hindsight towards the majority of the campaign season...where did all of the money he raised for his Presidential campaign go? It certainly wasn't spent on televsion-radio-newspaper advertisements. Still sitting in the bank so that he can convert it to his personal use when he leaves Office maybe?

McCain also wants only rich and politically connected people to have guns
Click to expand...

No, he doesn't. His voting record over the years has been fairly solid in support of the second amendment. The Ron Paul fundies are grasping at straws here as they always do, in order to make Paul look better by comparison. McCains support for Federal legislation to require all non-FFL transactions to go through a background check is far less damaging to RKBA than Ron Paul's vote to allow the anti-gun zealots to continue to shut down gun manufacturers with junk lawsuits.

Read up on Charter2000's brush with oblivion, or Smith and Wesson's disasterous agreement with the antigunners, and Beretta's case, and etc. and then get back to me with a logical reason as to why Ron Paul's belief that these lawsuits are valid and should continue is less damaging to RKBA than McCain's support for private transfer NCIS background checks.

Ron Paul's support for legalizing pot doesn't make him some Constitutionalist hero. The Ron Paul diehards need to take a more mature view of life.

Paul and McCain are both self-promoting turds in my opinion. McCain is only slightly less stinky than Paul. But a turd is a turd.

Wake up and smell the coffee.
 
I think by now everyone on this forum is familiar enough with Rep. Paul's voting record on 2nd Amdt issues to see through CHL's attempt to mislead them.

Call him a kook or unrealistic if you like, but a gun grabber? I don't think that anybody's buyin' that. Or at least nobody who doesn't actively want to believe it.

Personally, I don't think he's a kook. I think he's one of the few in Washington that's sane. I don't think he's unrealistic. If anything strikes me as "defeatist", it's the idea that we're so far gone as a nation that adhering to our own Constitution is impossible. I don't think he's racist at all. Being a black guy who's met him several times, I tend to keep my own counsel in such matters.
I don't think he's an anti-semite. I know I'm not and I agree with his policy regarding Israel.

What I see is a man with poor political skills who's advocating everrything that has made the Republican party worth supporting. This doesn't indicate to me a man who's out of touch with the Republican party so much as a Republican party that's out of touch with it's own values.

He'll never be president, but maybe someone who's had their eyes opened by this campaign (someone with the savvy and charisma to make it) will be. After all, the majority of his supporters are a young crowd who would probably have otherwise gone to the Dems. His campaign introduced them to the positive attributes of conservatism.

I think that's worth doing. ;)
 
I think by now everyone on this forum is familiar enough with Rep. Paul's voting record on 2nd Amdt issues to see through CHL's attempt to mislead them.

Call him a kook or unrealistic if you like, but a gun grabber? I don't think that anybody's buyin' that. Or at least nobody who doesn't actively want to believe it.
Click to expand...

I think most folks on this forum can see through a blatent straw man argument like the one posted above by GoSlash27. He won't be able to point to the post where I labeled Ron Paul as a "gun grabber."

And, he won't be able to explain away Paul's vote against the PLCAA. It's in the Congressional Record. Paul did indeed vote against the Act that prevents the Brady Campaign and George Soros from shutting down gun manufacturers with junk lawsuits, as they nearly did recently with Charter2000 before MKS agreed to bail them out and distribute their products.

But hey, at least Paul was able to preserve his virginial purity regarding the right to file junk lawsuits. That's far more important than having an actual American firearms industry selling to the civilian market in the US, right?
 
Ron Paul is Barack Obama without oratorical skills. Just another unqualified hater.

Every election has to have its whimsical idiot with his legion of dedicated followers that make everyone else go :rolleyes:. Larouche, Stassen, Kucinich, Nader, Paul.

Its a tribute to the Repubs that they saw through the Paul silliness. Its a shame the Dems aren't as smart.

WildwhereislyndonAlaska TM
 
He won't be able to point to the post where I labeled Ron Paul as a "gun grabber."
Click to expand...
So then you agree that Ron Paul is not a gun grabber? Just so we're all clear on this. :)
And while we're at it, how does Paul stack up overall against McCain on 2nd Amendment issues? Are you going to put forth the argument that the Republican nominee has a better 2nd Amdt record? Or is this another "strawman" attempt on my part?
I'm just trying to clarify your position, because the way I'm reading your posts conveys an attempt to mislead.
Just what is your point here?
 
Can you name a single significant pro-gun Bill Ron Paul has authored that has been enacted into law over his 20 year career?
Click to expand...

No. Can you name one McCain has authored? You did start this by comparing Paul to McCain, so is this a valid point of comparison?

where did all of the money he raised for his Presidential campaign go? It certainly wasn't spent on televsion-radio-newspaper advertisements. Still sitting in the bank so that he can convert it to his personal use when he leaves Office maybe?
Click to expand...

That would be both illegal and inconsistent with Paul's position as one of the very few Congresscritters to refuse their generous pension package.

then get back to me with a logical reason as to why Ron Paul's belief that these lawsuits are valid and should continue
Click to expand...

He has no such belief. Why are you lying? Fear of the truth?

Ron Paul said:
While I am against the federalization of tort reform, I must voice my complete disapproval of the very nature of these suits brought against gun manufacturers. Lawsuits for monetary damages from gun violence should be filed against the perpetrators of those crimes, not gun manufacturers! Holding manufacturers liable for harm they could neither foresee nor prevent is irresponsible and outlandish. The company that makes a properly functioning product in accordance with the law is acting lawfully, and thus should not be taken to court because of misuse by the purchaser (or in many cases, by a criminal who stole the weapon). Clearly these lawsuits are motivated not by a concern for justice, but by a search for deep pockets and a fanatical anti-gun political agenda.
Click to expand...
 
Its a tribute to the Repubs that they saw through the Paul silliness.
Click to expand...

Many actually agree with his small government ideas, but just think they can't be enacted.

It's also a tribute to the Repubs that they saw your man Rudy for the gungrabber he is, and he fell from his lead in the polls despite spending many times what Paul spent on his campaign.

How is it that you have time to sling mud at Ron Paul? Weren't you supposed to be working on an analysis of the Wickard case and commerce clause issues? Or continuing the unfinished tale of jury nullification? Do you ever finish a task?
 
It is amazing that people who consider themselves conservative go around bashing a strong conservative like Ron Paul while holding up the liberal McCain as a virtuous leader whom we should all get behind. It goes to show how easy it is for the media to sway the minds of people who do not pay attention to facts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top