Ron Paul Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
irishpatrick said:
So, you think allowing Obama to get a second term is better than all of the other GOP candidates? Really?
Click to expand...
I didn’t say that. I said that if both options are morally repugnant to me, I am fully within my rights to refrain from giving my consent.

I got caught up in the whole McCain thing. I am not wasting my vote anymore. In fact, even if Paul runs third party, which he has professed that he will not, I won’t vote for him either. We have a Duolopolistic political system and I acknowledge that a third party has as much chance of winning national office as I do.

It would be nice if Demcrats were as respulsed by that party as most sensible Republicans are at the GOP. But, when your policy is to rob Peter to pay Paul, you can always count on the support of Paul.
 
rlg94086 said:
I recall having posted something about that in the past…sure enough:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=2969124&postcount=1

Yes, sometimes voting for the lesser of two evils is licit. I’m sorry if you are an absolutist and believe in cutting off your nose to spite your face. 🤷
Click to expand...
I am perfectly comfortable with the thought of giving an accounting of my refusal to vote to Jesus when that time comes. If you are, good for you! That’s great. I can’t violate my conscience anymore.
 
Scott_Lafrance said:
It would be nice if Demcrats were as respulsed by that party as most sensible Republicans are at the GOP. But, when your policy is to rob Peter to pay Paul, you can always count on the support of Paul.
Click to expand...
Are you saying Ron Paul supports the Democrats? 😉
 
Scott_Lafrance said:
I am perfectly comfortable with the thought of giving an accounting of my refusal to vote to Jesus when that time comes. If you are, good for you! That’s great. I can’t violate my conscience anymore.
Click to expand...
And, I fully support your right to vote that way, even though I think it is a mistake. I was disagreeing, as does my pastor and the USCCB, with your statement that voting for a lesser evil is still evil.
 
Scott_Lafrance said:
I didn’t say that. I said that if both options are morally repugnant to me, I am fully within my rights to refrain from giving my consent.

I got caught up in the whole McCain thing. I am not wasting my vote anymore. In fact, even if Paul runs third party, which he has professed that he will not, I won’t vote for him either. We have a Duolopolistic political system and I acknowledge that a third party has as much chance of winning national office as I do.

It would be nice if Demcrats were as respulsed by that party as most sensible Republicans are at the GOP. But, when your policy is to rob Peter to pay Paul, you can always count on the support of Paul.
Click to expand...
Do you not understand? Had Catholics voted for McCain last time, we would not have Obamacare, we would not have TARP and all the deeply damaging things the Democrats have put in place. Plus, McCain would have picked a much different judge for the Supreme Court bench.

BTW, you have a right to do whatever you want with your vote, but to do nothing means you also forfeit being able to hold an opinion that most people would ever want to hear–people who talk, but do nothing, are worthless in their views. Actions always speak louder than words.
 
irishpatrick said:
Do you not understand? Had Catholics voted for McCain last time, we would not have Obamacare, we would not have TARP and all the deeply damaging things the Democrats have put in place. Plus, McCain would have picked a much different judge for the Supreme Court bench.

BTW, you have a right to do whatever you want with your vote, but to do nothing means you also forfeit being able to hold an opinion that most people would ever want to hear–people who talk, but do nothing, are worthless in their views. Actions always speak louder than words.
Click to expand...
Maybe you should spend more of your time and energy convincing Catholic Democrats to stop voting for the Party of Death and Corruption.
 
Scott_Lafrance said:
I am perfectly comfortable with the thought of giving an accounting of my refusal to vote to Jesus when that time comes. If you are, good for you! That’s great. I can’t violate my conscience anymore.
Click to expand...
You think that it is fine to ignore the abortion and marriage issues? I do not care what other issues burn in your heart, if you refuse to vote for a prolife candidate, than you are saying abortion and marriage does not matter–you are saying the unborn does not matter enough for you to drive to your polling place to vote. The SC is one vote away from being a prolife court, and the next term might very well have at least one appointee, and you are perfectly willing to let Obama make another choice, which would enshrine the court as prochoice for the next 2-3 decades. What if it all that hinged on just your ONE single vote?

I held my nose with McCain too–but I voted for him because the alternative was terrible, and we have seen that all our fears came true. You are telling me you don’t think that any of the GOP candidates are not better than Obama? (I said ‘better’ not ‘perfect’)
 
irishpatrick said:
You think that it is fine to ignore the abortion and marriage issues? I do not care what other issues burn in your heart, if you refuse to vote for a prolife candidate, than you are saying abortion and marriage does not matter–you are saying the unborn does not matter enough for you to drive to your polling place to vote. The SC is one vote away from being a prolife court, and the next term might very well have at least one appointee, and you are perfectly willing to let Obama make another choice, which would enshrine the court as prochoice for the next 2-3 decades. What if it all that hinged on just your ONE single vote?

I held my nose with McCain too–but I voted for him because the alternative was terrible, and we have seen that all our fears came true. You are telling me you don’t think that any of the GOP candidates are not better than Obama? (I said ‘better’ not ‘perfect’)
Click to expand...
How much longer am I supposed to buy the GOP arguement that “we are only one vote away from the Supreme Court!”? 38 years?
 
irishpatrick said:
Do you not understand? Had Catholics voted for McCain last time, we would not have Obamacare, we would not have TARP and all the deeply damaging things the Democrats have put in place. Plus, McCain would have picked a much different judge for the Supreme Court bench.

BTW, you have a right to do whatever you want with your vote, but to do nothing means you also forfeit being able to hold an opinion that most people would ever want to hear–people who talk, but do nothing, are worthless in their views. Actions always speak louder than words.
Click to expand...
I’ll leave aside the rest for a moment, but the part in bold needs to be addressed. The TARP was a bipartisan law signed by George W. Bush, not Obama, and McCain voted in favor of it. TARP is precisely the kind of thing that the mainstream GOP supports that those of us who support Ron Paul disagree with.

In answer to your previous question about supporting GOP candidates other than Ron Paul, I’ll just say this:

I will not vote for someone who supports abortion. Period.

I will not vote for someone who supports massive corporate bailouts. Period.

I will not vote for someone who supports pre-emptive military strikes by the U.S. on Iran (or any other nation) without immediate, direct, and impending threat to the U.S. Period.

I will not vote for someone who supports the suspension of our Common Law tradition and Habeas Corpus. Period.

These are my bare minimum non-negotiables. If any other GOP candidates who fit this bill get the nomination, I will happily vote for them. I will not vote for anyone who fails on these points just in the hopes of favorable Supreme Court appointments, because 1) such appointments aren’t a guarantee, and 2) they are not required to overturn Roe v. Wade (see Article 3, Section 2 of the Constitution).

Peace and God bless!
 
Scott_Lafrance said:
How much longer am I supposed to buy the GOP arguement that “we are only one vote away from the Supreme Court!”? 38 years?
Click to expand...
But, we actually are one vote away–it is not just a lie or a line.

Please, think it through. What if Bush had just one more SC appointment to make? Where would we be?

As soon as we get that extra vote, there will be a stream of Roe v. Wade challenges sent to the court, and the Democrats know that is true! We are struggling (and it is an epic struggle) to get that vote for the SC!

Imagine the joy we will feel when it is sent back to the states and we can start changing the state laws one-by-one…it will be just a matter of time before all states will comply, and then not long after that the left will concoct some means of using all of that to theur advantage–but we won’t care because the innocents will be saved!
 
Ghosty said:
I’ll leave aside the rest for a moment, but the part in bold needs to be addressed. The TARP was a bipartisan law signed by George W. Bush, not Obama, and McCain voted in favor of it. TARP is precisely the kind of thing that the mainstream GOP supports that those of us who support Ron Paul disagree with.

In answer to your previous question about supporting GOP candidates other than Ron Paul, I’ll just say this:

I will not vote for someone who supports abortion. Period.

I will not vote for someone who supports massive corporate bailouts. Period.

I will not vote for someone who supports pre-emptive military strikes by the U.S. on Iran (or any other nation) without immediate, direct, and impending threat to the U.S. Period.

I will not vote for someone who supports the suspension of our Common Law tradition and Habeas Corpus. Period.

These are my bare minimum non-negotiables. If any other GOP candidates who fit this bill get the nomination, I will happily vote for them. I will not vote for anyone who fails on these points just in the hopes of favorable Supreme Court appointments, because 1) such appointments aren’t a guarantee, and 2) they are not required to overturn Roe v. Wade (see Article 3, Section 2 of the Constitution).

Peace and God bless!
Click to expand...
I meant to say the auto bailouts, but thanks for the correction.

So, does unborn life mean so little that they are not worthy of your vote if you do not get your personal wish list?
 
rlg94086 said:
Waffling involves changing a position back-and-forth…like saying “I have no intention of running third party” in an interview, later saying “I won’t rule that out,” and then stating again that he has no intention of running third party. You call that “not an absolutist.” I call it a flakey waffle.
Click to expand...
I dont think you are grasping what it means to intend to do something. I dont intend to visit a cancer doctor. I won’t rule it out because if I get cancer then I probably will. Based on the current situation Ron Paul is not planning on running outside of the Republican Party. But he does not want to shut any doors.
rlg94086 said:
I’m not a one-issue, anti-war voter, so, again, your point about how active military vote really doesn’t interest me. His lack of leadership ability is evident from his years in Congress. How many things did he author and get passed by his colleagues? If he couldn’t succeed in Congress, why should I have confidence in his ability to lead the whole nation?
Click to expand...
If the mark of leadership is getting bills passed by Congress then you should vote for Obama. He was able to get Congress to completely destroy health care in the US. Of course George Bush was able to increase the size of government and the welfare state by getting the Medicare Prescription Drug Act passed. That is the kind of leadership I dont care for. The reason Ron Paul could not get bills passed is because the Republicans are not really conservative. They are so focused on making wars and taking away civil liberty that they dont bother to get behind Dr. Paul’s bills which would actually achieve a proclaimed party objective.
Michael_C said:
Good point. it’s getting to the point where citizens will have to just withdraw the consent of the governed.
Click to expand...
Thanks.
rlg94086 said:
You just rendered all your posts irrelevant. Why should I care about the opinion of someone who isn’t going to vote?
Click to expand...
irishpatrick said:
Wow. You desired to get into a lengthy discussion about Ron Paul, and yet you won’t even vote? Your opinion has zero value to any person who actually cares about this country. Worthless.
Click to expand...
I worked with a guy from Communist Poland. He grew up towards the end of that oppressive rule. I had never really thought about it but they had voting the same as us. In fact it was very important to vote. If you did not you would suffer in the various ways the communist party could make you suffer. This person and a few friends chose not to vote and for that they suffered.

Upon reflection I realized that often times not voting is far more important than voting. The communists wanted you to vote so that they could say the ‘people have spoken’. What is more powerful than that? If only 5% of eligible voters voted the government would actually fear the people. Was this man from Poland’s opinion worthless since he refused to vote? Is that what you both are asserting?
irishpatrick said:
Do you not understand? Had Catholics voted for McCain last time, we would not have Obamacare, we would not have TARP and all the deeply damaging things the Democrats have put in place. Plus, McCain would have picked a much different judge for the Supreme Court bench.
Click to expand...
Hold on. Bush gave us the Medicare Prescription Drug Act. Romney gave Mass Obamacare. Newt was for forced insurance himself. You are making a rather bold claim about what might have been. Oh and TARP started under Bush.
Scott_Lafrance said:
How much longer am I supposed to buy the GOP arguement that “we are only one vote away from the Supreme Court!”? 38 years?
Click to expand...
Yeah the argument had to turn into one vote because the Republican Party held 7 of 9 seats in the 2000s. When you go back and research you find that Republican have usually controlled the Supreme Court while all these terrible laws were upheld or created over the last 50 years. Abortion was made legal by a Republican court. The Republican Court could have repealed it in the early part of the last decade. But of course they didn’t.

I’ve decided Republican voters are like abused spouses who buy the line ‘I promised I changed’.
 
irishpatrick said:
But, we actually are one vote away–it is not just a lie or a line.

Please, think it through. What if Bush had just one more SC appointment to make? Where would we be?

As soon as we get that extra vote, there will be a stream of Roe v. Wade challenges sent to the court, and the Democrats know that is true! We are struggling (and it is an epic struggle) to get that vote for the SC!
Click to expand...
Please research this. The Republicans have controlled the SC.

And they had their chance in 1993.
It gets crazier. In 1993 the Court handed down one of the most bizarre decisions of all time. For two decades, enemies of legal abortion had been supporting Republican candidates in the hope of filling the Court with appointees who would review Roe v. Wade. In Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the Court finally did so. But even with eight Republican appointees on the Court, the result was not what the conservatives had hoped for. The Court reaffirmed Roe.
Click to expand...
How Tyranny Came to America
 
exnihilo said:
I

I worked with a guy from Communist Poland. He grew up towards the end of that oppressive rule. I had never really thought about it but they had voting the same as us. In fact it was very important to vote. If you did not you would suffer in the various ways the communist party could make you suffer. This person and a few friends chose not to vote and for that they suffered.

Upon reflection I realized that often times not voting is far more important than voting. The communists wanted you to vote so that they could say the ‘people have spoken’. What is more powerful than that? If only 5% of eligible voters voted the government would actually fear the people. Was this man from Poland’s opinion worthless since he refused to vote? Is that what you both are asserting?

.
Click to expand...
This is the USA, and yes every single vote does count, and if you are not willing to vote, than your opinion about politics and the nation are worthless.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top