Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul likes to portray himself as a consistent proponent of a libertarian philosophy. The truth is, though, that Ron Paul is a sometime libertarian who picks and chooses the time to get ideological.
Take, for example, Ron Paul’s treatment of Rosa Parks. Ron Paul chose to get libertarian on Rosa Parks back in 1999 when he was the only member of the House of Representatives to vote against awarding Rosa Parks the Congressional Gold Medal.
Why would Ron Paul vote against recognizing the work of Rosa Parks in bringing liberty to huge numbers of Americans living under the injustice of racial segregation? Ron Paul claimed that it was nothing personal against Rosa Parks, but in line with his libertarian principles, he just could not vote in favor of Congress giving Rosa Parks a Congressional Gold Medal. You see, Ron Paul explained, there’s nothing in the Constitution that authorizes Congress to award anyone a medal.
It would be one thing if Ron Paul’s slight against Rosa Parks were taken as a part of a consistent defense of a super-literal reading of the Constitution. However, the plain fact is that Ron Paul has supported congressional awards to other people, even though he wouldn’t do so for Rosa Parks. Why, just this year, Ron Paul congratulated 90 students from his congressional district who were competing for the Congressional Art Competition Award.
Now, the last time I read the Constitution, I didn’t see anywhere at all where Congress is authorized to give awards to high school students for making pretty pictures. Yet, Ron Paul didn’t seem to think there was anything wrong with that. Ron Paul decided that, when it came to pandering to the voters in his home district, there was no need to get so literal in his reading of the Constitution.
That’s Ron Paul’s inconsistent libertarianism for you: Rosa Parks can’t get a congressional award, but high school students are welcome to their own congressional awards. Pardon me for being so blunt, but those are some pretty stupid priorities Ron Paul has got when it comes to when he gets snippy about congressional awards.
To be fair to Ron Paul, he does have one other excuse for voting against a Congressional Gold Medal for Rosa Parks. Ron Paul said it would cost too much. Ron Paul said that the expense of 30,000 dollars was just not worth it.
Do you know how the tax burden of 30,000 dollars divides up for each American citizen? One hundreth of one penny per citizen. Apparently, Ron Paul didn’t even think Rosa Parks was worth that much. Get a grip, Congressman Paul.
(Sources: Congressional Record: April 20, 1999; Ron Paul’s congressional web site, April 17, 2007)
Was the art award free? If so, the Congress can vote for it if it so desires.
It’s not really comparable to Rosa Parks’ award. Actually, Parks’ award would be comparable to other awards involving expensive gold medals, which Paul has always voted against, even when they have been awarded to Republicans.
I don’t care how little per person it adds up to. It’s Congress handing out expensive gold medals for no demonstrable public purpose. What non-symbolic public purpose is achieved by these medals? To be nice to Parks? If it was about being nice to Parks, the Congress should have chipped in 100 bucks each to buy her a medal [which Paul volunteered to do, by the way].
It’s amazing that your head actually stays on its neck. The amount of spin you attempt to place on this forum Mr. Clifford is astounding.
Ron Paul voted against giving Congressional Medals of Honor to everyone. This included Ronald Reagan( his most ardent supporter), Rosa Parks, Mother Theresa,Pope John Paul II.
After voting no, he took money out of his own pocket ($100) and asked other members of Congress to join him in contributing private funds to obtain the medals. No one attempted to donate. You see it’s far easier to steal money from the Taxpayers than it is to pony up the money themselves.
If every member of congress had given $100.00, there would have been enough to mint that $30,000.00 medal with a nice bit left over for the next recipient.
Don’t look now Mr. Clifford, your bias is showing.
Actually, your way off base with Ron Paul. He has voted against EVERY congressional medal ever in his path. And his reason is the same everytime. If it costs the taxpayers money – he votes NO. I commend him. He has asked in the past for Congress to pay for Rosa Parks out of their own money… He even offered his own $100 if everyone else agreed.
I commend him on his consistency and commitment to the American Public. His ideals on taxes are revolutionary, and I’m all ears.
First off, Rosa Parks never received the “Congressional Medal of Honor” because it is a military award.
What she recieved was the Congressional Gold Medal.
The articles jclifford is referring to are here:
http://www.ronpaul.org/
in the press releases and here:
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec99/cr042099.htm
Here is the resolution he voted against:
http://www.congress.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c106:H.R.573:
I looked all over and couldn’t find anything in the United States Code about the “Congressional Arts Contest” so I took a look at the press releases from other Congressmen.
This was the most discriptive:
http://joewilson.house.gov/index.cfm?ParentID=2&SectionID=30&SectionTree=2,30&SearchKey=art%20contest§ionTypeID=2
It seems the purpose of the contest is to have High School students submit pieces of art to the office of their district’s Congressmen. Such pieces are then judged by local arts councils or schools, and the winners are displayed in a corridor of the Capitol Building.
Why bother with a gold medal awarded by Congree for anyone at all? It just sits in their homes like a trophy. A certificate of some sort, or a request for a unanimous declarion of honor to be recorded in the Congressional Record would do the same. By the time the Congress gets around to awarding a medal, the recipients have probably recieved all kinds of stipends and cash awards from private groups anyway.
What is the benefit of spending up to $30,000 of the taxpayer’s money to mint a medal that sits on a shelf?
-That- is what Ron Paul is on record as being against.
Opps, and that was my bad. It was the Congressional Medal of Freedom, not Honor. What a get for cutting and pasting.
The Congressional Medal of Freedom is the highest Honor that a civlian may receive.
GRRRRR……. Presidential Medal of Freedom…… I swear new fingers today
Awwww… To heck with it.
Spanky has it right, The Congressional Gold Medal.
The President gives out the Presidential Medal of Freedom.
Hey, a Ron Paul supporter that admits he makes mistakes……
Mr. Clifford might surprise us and do the same………Nah!
Yes, the name of the medal given in the piece is incorrect:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_Gold_Medal
J Clifford, you need to edit that typo.
I do not see any articles or any press releases at the Ron Paul link posted above, that appears to be a typo as well.
Categorizing the medal as “spending up to $30,000 of the taxpayers money” is not quite correct. If you read the bill it authorizes using “enterprise funds” to pay for it, but also stipulates that the medal be cast in bronze and be made available to the general public for a fee in order to recoup the expenditure. The medal is indeed for sale from the U.S. mint here:
http://catalog.usmint.gov/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10001&storeId=10001&productId=11074&langId=-1
and here:
http://catalog.usmint.gov/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10001&storeId=10001&productId=11075&langId=-1
What’s the big deal anyhow? Does Ron Paul vote against all spending bills or just the ones with symbolic amounts of money that support national icons he doesn’t agree with? Is he also against enterprise funds? Ron Paul’s vote seems sort of mean-spirited.
Iroquois,
Ron Paul claims he votes against all spending bills that he feels are outside the scope of the Constitutionally limited role of Congress.
Two places you can review his votes are here:
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/p000583/votes/page1/
And here:
http://www.vote-smart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=296
I see why they call him “Doctor No”.
Bullshit really doesn’t last long on the internet.
Irregular Times, totally pwnd.
Yes, it was an error to write that it was a “Congressional Medal of Honor”. I’ve corrected that to “Congressional Gold Medal”.
Is that really, Buckwheat, TOTALLY pwnd?
I don’t get how it is, because that little detail doesn’t change the hypocrisy Ron Paul has shown in his precious prima don libertarian pose.
The argument is the same. Ron Paul said it was unconstitutional for the Congress to issue a medal to recognize a great citizen. Yet, he didn’t show the same scruples at all in Congress issuing awards to high school students for making pretty pictures, helping him pander to the voters in his home district.
Two standards: One for voters to pander to, and another for Rosa Parks. Rosa Parks got the shaft from Ron Paul.
The 100 dollar personal offer, if Ron Paul made it, isn’t the point. The point is that he thought that spending one hundredth of one cent of taxes contributed by citizens, in order to recognize Rosa Parks was wasteful and insulting to the people of the United States because it wasn’t their choice for how to spend their money. What Ron Paul hasn’t realized is that it’s his job as a member of a representative legislature to make just that sort of decision. How Ron Paul, or the other members of Congress, spend their personal money is not the point. The sixteenth amendment to the Constitution authorizes the government to collect income taxes, and implicitly, to spend them. Ron Paul’s choice of how to spend PUBLIC money is what’s at issue, and he showed some truly awful priorities in this vote.
If Ron Paul can let his ideas about Constitution slide for high school art students, why not for Rosa Parks?
As Ron Paul’s record shows, Bullshit really DOES last a long time on the Internet.
Congress doesn’t issue awards to HS students for their art.
Read the link to Congressman Joe Wilson’s presss release in comment #4. There is nothing anti-Constitutional about it.
You haven’t made a case what value is to be had from spending up to $30,000 of the taxpayer’s money on a gold medal that will sit on a shelf.
When you can explain why spending the money on the medal is more important than, say, a testimonial in the Congressional Record, then you will be on your way to supporting your claim about “awful priorities.”
$30,000 isn’t much in a Congressional Budget, but it could mean that a government employee stays on the job one more year, for example. You really don’t think there are higher priorities for the use of -any- money spent on these kinds of medals?
SST’s main points seem to be 1) no it isn’t 2) no it isn’t 3)no it isn’t 4) do you really think so.
I don’t find it very convincing.
As I have pointed out before, there is no “press release in post #4.
I don’t see Ron Paul offering to host the high school art contest on his own computer, or using his personal campaign office and staff to handle the details of the contest and what must be huge numbers of pictures mailed in from schoolchildren, or paying from his own pocket to hire people to install the pictures in the public buildings. It DOES look like a double standard over the use of public resources. I guess he doesn’t care whether Rosa Parks’ parents vote for him.
I wonder if Ron Paul has any problem cashing his paychecks.
Actully, he has opted out of the Congressional Pension plan (per his website).
Why are you-all only harping on the Rosa Parks vote? He has always voted against such medals – why just pick on this particular vote?
No one has answered why such medals need to be minted in the first place. The link cited to Ron Paul’s C.R. entry wrt the bill explains his feelings about Rosa Parks.
Look at what he said, not what you feel.
“I don’t see Ron Paul offering to host the high school art contest on his own computer,…”
You don’t see anything about it at all on Ron Paul’s website but the press release from April 14th.
I found it very difficult to come up with anything difinitive about the contest at all. The best information I could find was from Rep. Joe Wilson. What in that post makes you believe any tax money is being expended on the contest? Do you have better references?
Why do you-all not answer what I wrote rather than just inventing things out of thin air?
You seem to think, SST, that the burden of proof is always on someone else. That you can just say “No, it isn’t” and not provide any reasons or citations. Or that the reason was stated by someone else once in a link somewhere that you can’t provide but you can’t seem to state the reason yourself.
I tell you why you can’t give any reasons. There aren’t any.
No, you have made the assertions and the burden of proof is on you.
~Prove that the office of Congressman Joe Wilson at
1700 Sunset Boulevard in West Columbia , South Carolina, where the student art is to be sent, is being run without tax money.
~Prove that the framed art sent by “hundreds of thousands of high school students” to this address was handled without taxpayer expense.
~Prove that the salary of the assistant who handles information requests, Preston Grisham, and the telephone bill where requests are directed, in Congressman Joe Wilson’s Midlands Office at 803-939-0041, are not being paid from taxpayer money.
~Prove that the “panel of qualified persons” who jury the contest as well as the “Architect of the Capitol” who chairs them are not salaried with taxpayer money.
And oh, look, it says right in the piece you linked to that use of official resources are authorized by the Committee on House Administration and the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct. My, my, my. Why hasn’t Ron Paul protested THAT?
If Ron Paul has always voted against medals, why has he not voted against this high school art competition? No one has answered why this competition has to be held in the first place.
If this art competition is not being held at public expense, then how is it made possible? Hamsters with conveyor belts? Armies of independently wealthy doctors? Tinkerbell with a magic wand?
In fact, that’s pretty much what’s wrong with the whole Ron Paul never-never land scheme. If there are no taxes, how can we have a government–including those little art contests Ron Paul likes to vote for.
No, the burden of proof is on the person making the original claim.
I never said the Congressional Art Contest was or was not supported with tax money. I said I had no evidence one way or the other. I did not make a claim I couldn’t support, because I made no claim.
I’ll send an e-mail to Ron Paul’s office about it today, and publish it here when I get a response.
“In fact, that’s pretty much what’s wrong with the whole Ron Paul never-never land scheme. If there are no taxes, how can we have a government–including those little art contests Ron Paul likes to vote for.”
See? You’ve done it again. Please provide proof for this claim you made that Ron Paul thinks we should have no taxes. -You- made the claim. -You- provide the proof.
That’s just a basic rule of logical argumentation.
“Spanky”, this article and the source it sites – Ron Paul’s own congressional web site – makes it quite clear that Congress actually DOES issue awards to high school art students, and Ron Paul approves of the constitutionality of that, even though he said Rosa Parks getting a congressional award would be unconstitutional.
Yet, you just assert that it’s not true. What’s next? Are you going to say that black is white?
Truly, do you have any evidence that black is not white? Come, now. I think you’re engaging in an ad hominem ergo cabot draconum circumnavigation bis muth attack!
Truly wrote:
“Spankyâ€, this article and the source it sites – Ron Paul’s own congressional web site – makes it quite clear that Congress actually DOES issue awards to high school art students, and Ron Paul approves of the constitutionality of that, even though he said Rosa Parks getting a congressional award would be unconstitutional.
Here is the main text from the press release from Ron Paul’s congressional website:
Congressional Art Competition Final Judging
April 17, 2007
Lake Jackson, TX: This year marks the 26th anniversary of the Congressional art competition. Every congressional district picks one eventual winner for the prestigious honor of representing it in Washington DC.
More than 90 high school students from across the 14th congressional district have submitted entries. The winning piece will hang in the United States Capitol in Washington for one year. Since the competition began in 1982, hundreds of thousands of high school students nationwide have participated. The following members of the Brazosport Art League will serve as judges: Lillie Alcala – President of Brazosport Art League, Mary Bates Sechrest – Member of the Brazosport Art League, and Amy Chen – Public Relation for the Brazosport Art League
Good luck to the following students!
[List of students]
What the press release says is that local art league members will judge the peices and the one they select will be sent to hang in the Captol and Ron Paul wishes them luck.
Where does it say anything about an award that Congress will issue?
Jclifford,
Please watch this – it explains his stance on the medal. Also gives his voting record on Reagan, Mother Teresa, the Pope, Rosa Parks etc…
Your searching for an argument that can’t be made.
Hope this helps balance the argument.
A quick glance at cliffords writings will reveal a lot. The man is obviously a basher who up to this point I have not seen write one good thing about Ron Paul which detracts from any objectivity that he may be presumed to have. Even the Enron writings were so flawed that he must think Ron Paul is a GOD or something to be able to have the knowledge to have known that the energy crisis was fake, when in fact, tens of thousands of people didn’t know..which as I say this all brings me back to the only conclusion that must be in play. Mr. Clifford must clearly have an alterior motive. I think if you take a closer look at Mr. Clifford you will find the missing link as to why he is writing what he does.
He knows what he is doing and he knows why! However, he doesn’t think anyone will look to see why!
Greg, Ron Paul’s stance on the medal does not explain why he won’t take the same stance on giving an award to high school students. It’s plain hypocrisy, because the Constitution no more or no less grants Congress the power to bestow honors on high school students than it does to bestow honors on great citizens. If Ron Paul opposes honoring Rosa Parks on the basis of the argument that it’s not enabled by the Constitution, then he ought to be doing the same to those high school students.
Ron Paul won’t, because while Rosa Parks was not a voter in Ron Paul’s district, the parents of those high school students are. Ron Paul will throw away his libertarianism in order to pander to the voters.
Billy, don’t be silly. I write about plenty of things other than Ron Paul, as anyone can see if they look. Why would I write things and put them online, and then think that no one would look to see what I’m writing? That wouldn’t make sense, would it?
As for the fact that I don’t write fawning praise for Ron Paul, well, I can see that there are more than enough people already doing that. Ron Paul’s supporters are so cultishly devoted to avoiding the realization that Ron Paul is imperfect that they’ll make the weirdest arguments to excuse his behavior.
Thank you for the response.
I apologize for the cultish following of Ron Paul, because I too get annoyed, and I’m a supporter. I think if anything you need to see that Americans are hungry for change. And Ron Paul is a change from ALL of the other candidates. Does he have flaws? ABSOLUTELY. Anyone that can’t find a flaw with him shouldn’t have the power to vote – because that’s way to shortsighted. However, I’m sticking to my guns on this one – Ron did nothing wrong with having the HS kids recognized.
This was not a matter of federal government, or my taxes. Perhaps people in his district paid for the awards? I don’t know. If so, yes, I understand your point partially. But, I would rather have someone looking out for the whole of the group, aka, the country.
Honestly, I think Ron Paul has some nutcase ideas, but he’s my candidate because I believe in the ability to have the Senate and House vote on issues and become a balanced society. We need a president that is telling the truth. This country is in so much trouble right now – the war is a slippery slope, and the global policies need to change.
I want to be loved for being an American again. Ron Paul is my hope for this change. I could be crazy, mislead, but at least I’m searching and not accepting who CNN tells me I get to vote for.
Best on this blog, and feel free to email me with any discussions on RP.
Greg
Rosa Parks wasn’t from his district.
I have two questions that no one is answering:
1. What award did Ron Paul give to the art students?
Look yet again at the press release or anywhere else you can think of with accurate information. Other than announcing the finalists and wishing them luck, what did Ron Paul do AT ALL to move this contest forward?
Related to this, I hope that someone can explain what makes this a “Congressional†art contest, other than it being regional based on congressional districts and that Congressmen announce it via press releases.
2. Why is the “no†vote regarding the CGM for Rosa Parks any different than the “no†vote in every other instance regarding the CGM?
I can’t find anything – That doesn’t mean it’s not there, I just can’t find it.
Somebody who knows: Please answer (with citations, of course).
You left out the little tid-bit that Ron Paul offered to pay for part of the Gold Medal out of HIS OWN POCKET if other members of the House would agree to do the same. They chose not to.
Gee whiz, just a wee bit of a detail we left out there, eh?
Look, this is real simple. Ron Paul voted against a Congressional Gold Medal for Ron Paul, just like he has for others, because he was given the chance. I guarantee if you look back far enough of the Congressional Art Award was created by a bill he voted against it, but since it passed why wouldn’t he congratulate kids from his district for winning it? He may have not supported creating the award, but just because he didn’t doesn’t mean he can’t congratulate people for winning, especially given that I’m sure he was happy that the tax dollars used to create and provide the award at least in a way got back to his district and the people in it. In other words, just because he congratulates kids for winning the award doesn’t mean he supports the award itself.
What award? Show me an award that the students receive from the Congress (they may receive local awards, but that is in parallel to the contest, not a required part of it).
First off, he was barely serious about “chipping in for the medal” it was just a jibe at the other congress members. Far more telling is his voting against the extension of the 1964 Civil Rights Act add that to his essays where he condemns the civil rights movement, integration, the voting rights movement, multiculturalism and then he defends the rights of nazis and christian identity racists to spread hate propaganda.
His essays are to be found at LewRockwell.com.
Trying to say that his voting against the Rosa Parks medal has little to do with courting rightwing racists pales to the fact of his contributions to far right (and often racist) organisations like Council of Conservative Citizens (who has joint barbecues with Stormfront.org) and his fascination with the Confederacy and the right to fly the ‘stars and bars’…. it only indicates his predisposition to the interests of european americans and not the well being of ALL americans.
First of all, prove to me that the art students received awards at the expense of the taxpayers!
Just a fraction of a penny huh? Is that it? Not from me! You pay out of your own damn pocket! Ron Paul is correct on this issue
You also forgot to mention that Ron Paul denied the minting of an award for Ronald Reagan, a close friend of his. But of course you wouldn’t mention that, you’re a leftist gatekeeper.
I would like some source that shows the Art Contest winners are given travel, room and board to goto Congress. I also have to reiterate he refused an award for Mother Theresa, Churles Shultz and Ronald Reagan.
To which we must add that Paul cannot be ignorant of the effect of his refusal. Rosa Parks is one of the seminal figures in American history. Paul has to know how important she is to African Americans and to all fighters for civil rights. And given his racist associations, it’s a slap in the face.
RED DAVE
I agree. Take all other matters aside, and it’s a reflection on Ron Paul’s dramatic lack of perspective. He lacks the judgment necessary to understand and establish diplomatic relationships with other world leaders. Would he get so persnickety and excessively literal in his diplomatic relations, unable to see the forest for the trees?
I came here looking for “something” wrong with Ron Paul!!!! And all I am finding is a bunch of babbling adults beating a dead horse about awards for Rosa Parks and some high school kids!!! IS THIS ALL that is “wrong” with Ron Paul????
Geez, if it is…then maybe I need to reconsider who I am voting for!!!
If you won’t Ron Paul’s TRUE thoughts on racism all you have to do is read this essay:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul381.html
Really, many of you need to get your facts straight and stop misinterpreting Dr. Paul’s actions.
Congress is clearly authorized by the Constitution to engage in action that promotes the general welfare. Recognizing the contributions of Rosa Parks is clearly a good way to promote the general welfare. Therefore, it is absolutely constitutional for Congress to pass a resolution recognizing Rosa Parks and awarding her a medal.
Any high school government class student can understand this. As a medical doctor, Ron Paul surely understands the concept.
Ron Paul voted against recognizing the contributions of Rosa Parks.
Why should we go through contortions trying to justify Ron Paul’s small-minded behavior?
Ron Paul newbies: Don’t just buy the conspiracy-theory libertarian nonsense that the Ron Paul veterans will throw at you. Read the Constitution yourself, and consider the ramifications discussed by Jim at:
http://irregulartimes.com/index.php/archives/2007/10/23/of-course-national-parks-are-constitutional/
>Recognizing the contributions of Rosa Parks is clearly a good way to promote the general welfare.
Constitution “newbies”, please don’t believe everything you read on the Internet. “General Welfare” does not include awarding gold medals to specific individuals, at least not in the eyes of those who authored the Constitution.
>Any high school government class student can understand this.
I can’t argue with that. However, if you go beyond high school government class you might come to a deeper understanding. Try reading the writings of James Madison (father of the Constitution).
“If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one, subject to particular exceptions.” – James Madison, Letter to Edmund Pendleton, January 21, 1792 _Madison_ 1865, I, page 546
“I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constitutents.” – James Madison, regarding an appropriations bill for French refugees, 1794
“With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators.” – James Madison, Letter to James Robertson, April 20, 1831 _Madison_ 1865, IV, pages 171-172
“Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated.” – Thomas Jefferson
Don’t be fooled by Ben O. His is a selective reference to James Madison, as if James Madison was the only “founding father” out there, and as if James Madison’s letters had power to supercede the Constitution itself. James Madison is not “the father” of the Constitution in a singular sense, but one of many people who wrote it. Madison’s view of the Constitution is one view. The other view was held by Alexander Hamilton, who wrote that Article I Section 8 authorized appropriations for the general welfare. From the early Congresses onward, appropriations for the general welfare have been made in the Hamiltonian mode.
Here’s a nice synopsis, with references.
In regards to the debate between Ben O and Jim:
We are reliving the past, eh? The “Hamiltonians” v the “Jeffersonians” in essence. The reality is that we still have to think and use logic for ourselves. Personally, I think Alexander Hamilton was aristocratic-bred, loyalist to the King of England, and elitist. He’s the one that said a national debt is a national treasure (can you say “banker”?). That already makes me suspicious that he and his syncophants don’t have my best interest at heart. We were lucky that Hamilton won very few of the arguments and we didn’t live by his philosophy for the first hundred years of our country, but Hamiltonian thoughts and ways have, over time, crept into our system. The argument bottom lines to this: do you believe that people in general can take care of themselves, make generally good decisions, and exhibit charity or do you believe they are like dependent oxen that need to be led, fed, and controlled? And remember, before you answer this question, if you except yourself then you are choosing the hypocritical answer.
Uh, PM, since when is recognizing that Rosa Parks made significant contributions to the quality of the American nation making citizens into “dependent oxen that need to be led, fed, and controlled”?
That’s Ron Paul supporters for you: Libertarian philosophy, untethered to reality.
I wasn’t actually referring to your article, but to the last 2 commentators: my apologies. As regards to recognizing oustanding citizens and their contributions, isn’t there a way that Congress can make a statement for their records recognizing these people without having to use taxpayer money to give them a medal too? The Ron Paul “nay” vote boils down a “no” to the medal, not to Rosa Parks or her accomplishments. Is it more, or less hypocritical for him to vote no on all the others (Reagan, etc.) but then make an exception for Rosa Parks because it seems to be the safer political move? There was no bill to vote on regarding the high school students, whereas for each medal there is. What was there for Ron Paul to vote “nay” on with regards to these students?
oops, not your article, F. G. Fitzer.
Ah, but you see, PM, that it really doesn’t all come down to the bottom line that you say it all comes down to, does it?
Libertarian gap!
F.G.
Where’s your argument to counter my bottom line statement? I already admitted that I wasn’t referring to the blog post, but to other people’s comments. FWIW, I have never considered myself a Libertarian. I have been mostly apolitical, registered Republican (eek), but always thought of myself as something you may consider to be worse: a moderate.
But the “bottom line” I was stating was more about the general direction a person thinks our country should go: toward individual liberties and rights, or the sacrifice of these for “the betterment of the whole.”
What I find puzzling is that jclifford seems to be suportive of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, not too pleased with the MCA, and states “To win the war on terror, stop being afraid,” etc. but yet seems to have so much against Ron Paul. None of the other candidates that I know of seem to be against the MCA but RP.
There’s nothing in the Constitution to authorize bottom line statements! Your conduct is unconstitutional!
I’m joking there. Here’s a question: why do you frame these two in terms of either-or?
Look up Christopher Dodd. He, NOT Ron Paul, has authored and co-sponsored legislation to nullify the major provisions of the Military Commissions Act.
The reason I’m against Ron Paul is that, though he’s got an acceptable position on a couple of issues, he’s got a reprehensible idea of citizenship, a just plain sloppy understanding of the Constitution, and some really wacked out conspiracy theories about international conspiracies and the mythical North American Union. He’s also against separation of Church and State in his legislative record, has an outdated, religiously-motivated agenda on reproductive rights, and has been absent at best on global warming. Also, Ron Paul lacks the political leadership abilities required to be an effective President.
What’s to get excited about Ron Paul for?
PM says
“None of the other candidates that I know of seem to be against the MCA but RP.”
In fact Obama is against Military Commissions Act. I was in contact with his office right before the vote and received subsequent email. Mainly he says it violates Geneva convention, which he supports.
y’all’s site sucks!!!so y’all need a new sight before i call the cops on y’all!!!and