Topic: Ron Paul
Ron Paul's Lies, Non-Constitutional Votes, and Tax Hikes A list of Ron Paul's non Constitutional votes while in Congress and the ONLY thing you can count on from him should he be elected President.by John Armstrong
(libertarian)
Saturday, December 15, 2007
Below is an exhaustive list of every vote for a non-Constitutional law, spending bill, or tax that Ron Paul cast during his ten terms as a Congressman in order to pander to voters and be re-elected:
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Thanks for Reading,
John Armstrong
Article II Section I of the Constitution contains the Presidential Oath of Office (the ONE and only thing the person elected swears to do as President). The Oath is below. After reading it, if you still think Ron Paul isn't fit to be President or that his ideas are "strange" or out of the "mainstream" then the Department of Education has failed you. Or maybe it hasn't. You may want to instead consider the possibility that the 5,000 Employees at the Department of Education spent most of their $68.4Billion dollar budget last year (that comes from the part of your check each payday that doesn't go into your checking account) creating mandates for all schools to follow that make History the most somniferous class in the world so that generations of Americans would actually believe that Ron Paul and people like him are "crazy" or on the "fringe" so they could keep their jobs. Since, according to their own statistics, in 2002 (as in 1994) only 43% of 12th graders had a basic knowledge of U.S. History--the plan seems to be working. Anyway, Here's the Oath:
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States; and will, to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend, the Constitution of the United States."
Here is the Oath each member of the Congress takes (the one Ron Paul violated so many times as referenced by the list at the beginning of this article):
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter.
The Republicans swept into office in 1994 due in part (if not largely) to their "Contract With America." Well, Ron Paul realizes that we already have a Contract. In fact, this contract created our representative republic form of democratic government, defined its powers, and limited the federal government's power drastically so that it would not impinge upon the freedom of the individual.
This Contract is not an archaic document. In fact, it came complete (with easy to read instructions and everything) as to how it could be changed. It's called an Amendment. There were 10 of these that were introduced by the First Congress in 1789 and ratified in 1791. These 10 little changes are collectively called something you may have heard of once or twice even if you were asleep for most of History class--the Bill of Rights. Over the next 218 years there have only been 17 more (15 if you take away the two about Alcohol that cancel each other out). That doesn't mean that our rights and laws haven't changed, just that they have done so outside of the Contract "We the People" have with our Government. When that Contract was written, there were 3 federal crimes--Piracy, Counterfeiting, and Treason. Today there are over 5500--and this is only an approximation since nobody really knows for sure.
No big deal, really. I mean if you had a contract with an architect/contractor to build a 2-story 2,500 sq. ft. Victorian House and a clearly written provision that allowed changes to the contract only with your express permission, and you kept sending more and more money to this builder without ever going out to examine the house while it was under construction because you were too busy or things like building houses were just boring to you, and when it was finally done you had paid way more than you had intended and instead of a 2,500 sq. ft. Victorian, you were the proud owner of a 1200 sq. ft. 1 story Ranch style home, you probably wouldn't care, right? I mean, if he said, "yeah, I know we had that contract and all, and I wasn't supposed to be able to change it without your consent, but according to our latest poll, everyone wants a Ranch Style house so I figured I would just go ahead and build you one" that would be a justifiable reason for violating the contract wouldn't it? What's more important? A House Style, or your rights as an American Citizen? "Free" healthcare, or Freedom? Polls or Principles?
There is a reason the Constitution is mentioned in all of the Oaths of Office. It is a Contract. One that has been violated badly while we were sleeping in history class. If we don't like the contract, we can change it.
There is a reason it is difficult to change, and George Washington spoke of this in his farewell address:
Towards the preservation of your government, and the permanency of your present happy state, it is requisite...that you resist with care the spirit of innovation upon its principles, however specious (Deceptively attractive--universal healthcare, a drug-free America, an America safe from Terrorists, Liberating People from an Evil Dictator, etc.) the pretexts. One method of assault may be to effect, in the forms of the constitution, alterations, which will impair the energy of the system, and thus to undermine what cannot be directly overthrown (laws which impair freedoms which the Federal Government has no right to create but essentially circumvent the Constitution since it can't be directly overthrown). In all the changes to which you may be invited, remember that time and habit are at least as necessary to fix the true character of governments, as of other human institutions; that experience is the surest standard, by which to test the real tendency of the existing constitution of a country; that facility in changes, upon the credit of mere hypothesis and opinion (Human carbon dioxide emission is causing Global Warming, creating nationwide educational testing standards will raise the level of education, Ethanol is a valuable oil-alternative so we should subsidize corn, creating harsher drug laws will decrease drug dealers, sending a message to kids' about steroids will protect them), exposes to perpetual change, from the endless variety of hypothesis and opinion (the "perpetual change" of the current flavor of the day problems facing America explains the gargantuan government Washington warned us about which has eroded our liberties); and remember, especially, that, for the efficient management of our common interests, in a country so extensive as ours, a government of as much vigor as is consistent with the perfect security of liberty is indispensable (a strong national government is fine, in fact it is good, up to the point where liberty is threatened. Notice the word "perfect" and what it is that should be "perfectly secure"). Liberty itself will find in such a government, with powers properly distributed and adjusted (only Congress can declare war, judges can't make laws, Congress can't command the Armed Forces decide withdrawal dates, etc.), its surest guardian (so when powers are unadjusted liberty is threatened). It is, indeed, little else than a name, where the government is too feeble to withstand the enterprises of faction, to confine each member of the society within the limits prescribed by the laws, and to maintain all in the secure and tranquil enjoyment of the rights of person and property.
This speech was given in 1792. There's also some great stuff in there warning about the rise of political parties as well, but I'll let you read that on your own if you'd like.Those Founders, boy, let me tell you,they really had no idea what in the hell they were talking about. Isn't it time we remembered who we are? Shouldn't we remember why we became the greatest country in the history of the world? Shouldn't we elect a leader who will get back to holding up his end of the contract? Once we really get back to our core, if we don't like it, we can change it--the right way. We just have to get back to the foundation and make sure it's strong before we can build the right style house.
Want to send it to friends, but don't know their email addresses off the top of your head? Send it to yourself first and then send it to them.
As the author, (unlike the NFL) I give you full right to reproduce, rebroadcast, or transmit this article in any way you see fit to promote the cause of liberty and the restoration of the republic.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 186 thumbs so far
The views expressed in this
article are those of John Armstrong only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. John Armstrong is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
John, you forgot to mention that the ranch home has a $247 million security and internal surveillance system to make you feel safe. The first payment on that is due Jan 1.
Ron Paul is supposed to be representing the constituents of the 14th Congressional District of Texas in the US House of Representatives, not some nationwide libertarian constituency. He has much more of an obligation to the liberal Black female in Galveston, the Cattle Rancher in Victoria, or the Vietnamese Shrimping community in Port Lavaca, than he does to some computer geek Anarchist from Seattle.
Or, have you conveniently forgotten that little fact?
Hopefully, Paul will go 3rd party for President, and we in the 14th will be saved by his extremist fringe views.
Eric Dondero gets paid by Guiliani to troll around Ron Paul articles and attack him. Don't believe me? You won't find one article, of the thousands he has commented on, in which he says anything nice. Nice to see you're still alive and well Dondero.
Yes, he is supposed to represent his district, but he is not supposed to represent his district unconstituionally. The best way to represent your district is to push the federal government back to its constitutional limits. Besides, I"m pretty sure that once a bill has been passed that he opposed, if it is supposed to send money into his district then he fights very hard to get that money for his district.
Posted By: Michael McDonnough
Date: 2007-12-15 09:45:38
Dondero thinks you can be a war monger and a libertarian. He calls his little tiny click neo-libertarians. Just like neo-conservatives they are war mongers and statist.
Buying into the whole Islamofacist line of bull crap is for suckers in my view. The neo-conservatives needed to create a new enemy for the military industrial complex so they picked the Islamic extremist who would never go along with globalization and have been pumping up the threat so that we will have no peace dividend from the end of the cold war.
Hey, the Constitution Ron swore to up defend applies more to Galveston than the rest of the country. Now I know where we went wrong. Maybe they can move Congress to District 14 then, it's more Constitutional.
Its interesting what you can find on the intertubes. Apperently Dondero was once a staff member of Dr. paul until he was fired for his high rate of absenteeism.
If you digg deeper you will find that Dondero used to crash out at the office. The couch he slept on had to be burned after he left because it smelled so bad.
Well, Mr Dondero seems to think that somehow Dr. Paul neglects his district. Here's a letter to the Victoria Advocate from one of Dr. Paul's Constituents. This individual seems to think the opposite...
http://www.victoriaadvocate.com/896/story/166320.html
Hey Eric -- why not ask Ron Paul's constituents in Texas what they think of his record in Congress? They've elected him 10 times, so they can't be too unhappy about it.
Actually, Paul did vote in favor of banning partial-birth abortion. So that's one vote I can think of that's out of line. But to demand perfection when his record is already so much better than everyone else's would be silly.
"Posted By: Eric Dondero Date: 2007-12-15 09:11:36 - see comment above" Eric, we know who you are. Your comment is meaningless. You are totally alone (but for a few of your friends and family members, perhaps) in that opinion, among the thousand of admirers of Ron Paul in the 14th District. Eric's night job is trolling websites posting inflamatory stuff. As far as I know, you don't have a day job, but correct me if I'm wrong. Few Congressman can boast such universal support in his/her district than Ron Paul. He is a modern day hero! There will be a fundraiser tomorrow for Eric Dondero, and, by the way for Ron Paul as well. Let's see who raises the most money. Oops, the Dondero fundraiser has been canceled due to lack of interest.
Excellent article - well written, informative, and persuasive.
George Washington's farewell address is written in the style of that time. Consequently, it can be a bit daunting for contemporary readers. The full text can be found at (Link Edited For Length) Mr. Washington's points are timeless and you've made some excellent connections here.
Apparently, Eric Dunderhead-o confuses "neolibertarian" with "non-libertarian". I have no idea what the former refers to, but he certainly is the latter.
And poster Michael McDonnough has it exactly right: the hysterical, war-mongering "Islamofascist threat" is mostly just a big pile of steaming statist crap peddled to control the gullible and build the power of the state. I hang my head in shame and frustration that so many Americans are willing to buy into this totally Goebbles-esque fantasy.
Posted By: Walt Thiessen
Date: 2007-12-15 15:52:46
GG: All articles on this site are automatically date-stamped at the end of the article for publication date plus date of any most recent modifications.
Posted By: John Armstrong
Date: 2007-12-15 15:56:30
Dondero,
The fact that you could believe he has much more of an obligation to random constituents in his home district than to upholding his Oath of office and protecting the United States Constitution says a great deal about how crazy our "I want" system of government has become. When he swears in at the beginning of a term he doesn't say "I promise to do all I can to get my constituents all they want and then some, even if it means violating the Contract with the American people that grants the government the power to even exist.
As you well know, and if you were more intelligent, I may even think you posted this to try to get me or someone to state this as a trap--Dr. Paul does include things in bills that benefits his constituency. When the final bill gets done, he then votes against it, but everyone else pushes it through. This isn't done to find a sneaky way to be like other politicians but still keep a record about which he can brag. It's done because it's how politics work. If the way he voted was the majority vote on all issues, this wouldn't be necessary because taxes would be lower or non-existent and individual wealth/freedom would be higher so that these measures need not be included at all. Since his constituents are taxed highly due to the passage of all the legislation he votes down, this is the only way he can get them their money back and still keep his Oath.
Since Iowa is one of the states that actually gets far more money back from Washington than they put in, it isn't surprising that he isn't running as well there. I doubt you'll be back (you're more of a drive by shooter it seems) to make any more statements here, but I welcome you if you actually choose to engage in a discourse.
All he owes his constituents is doing all he can to secure their liberites. By upholding the Constitution. Which he does flawlessly.
Actually Eric, the fact that congress is in session is one reason Ron hasn't been quite as visible as the other candidates. He doesn't neglect his responsibility to his constituents like many of them do.
BTW, Eric are you behind the growing chorus of trolls posing as psycho RP supporters? Psst... close the blinds... you're being watched.
And John, I love your list of RP's transgressions. :D
I know is meant to be a comment for the article, which I thought was fantastic, but I too wanted to make a comment to E.D. I'm a new Ron Paul supporter (just a few months) and I've seen your comments around other articles. I pray that you will either grant forgiveness if you think Dr. Paul betrayed you or swallow your pride and seek forgiveness if you were rightly dismissed by him. In either case, your personal bitterness only poisons yourself. Afterwards, you should use your new found joy and go be a "good cheerleader" for the candidate of your choice. I hope you find peace.
I am trying to promote Ron Paul's Payday, and I am looking to enlist columnist to mention and/or write about this idea in an effort to help further spread the word. If you are unfamiliar with Ron Paul's Payday, check out the two videos I made -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ymbz6XrkXzQ and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BA5Z7HVFX4I -- where I lay out my case. Please contact me if you are interested in writing about Ron Paul's Payday.
I belive weve went to far there is no way to turn it around. No one man or party can. I doint think Ragan could but we must try one peace at a time. It would take 100 years of a true conserv. and getting rid of all the libs. to even have a chance pc will kill us all
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
