ON THE OTHER HAND ...
When a Republican seems to be too good to be true, he probably is. Take a look at Paul's voting record on the following issues:- Voted NO on allowing human embryonic stem cell research.
- Voted YES on funding for health providers who don't provide abortion info.
- Believes in no federal funding of abortion, and is pro-life.
- Paul is Rated 0% by NARAL, indicating a pro-life voting record.
- Voted YES on restricting bankruptcy rules.
- Voted YES on banning gay adoptions in DC.
- Voted YES on ending preferential treatment by race in college admissions. (May 1998)
- Rated 67% by the ACLU, indicating a mixed civil rights voting record.
- Voted YES on replacing illegal export tax breaks with $140B in new breaks. (Jun 2004)
(Vote to pass a bill that would repeal an export tax break for U.S. manufacturers ruled an illegal trade subsidy by the World Trade Organization, while providing for about $140 billion in new corporate tax cuts. Revenue raising offsets would decrease the cost of the bill to $34.4 billion over 11 years. It would consist of a buyout for tobacco farmers that could not go over $9.6 billion. It also would allow the IRS to hire private collection agencies to get back money from taxpayers, [strange for a guy who says citizens should pay no tax, huh?] and require individuals who claim a tax deduction for a charitable donation of a vehicle to obtain an independent appraisal of the car.)
- Voted YES on Bankruptcy Overhaul requiring partial debt repayment. (Mar 2001)
- Rated 46% by the US COC, indicating a mixed business voting record. (Dec 2003)
- Rated 60% by CURE, indicating mixed votes on rehabilitation.
- Voted NO on $84 million in grants for Black and Hispanic colleges.
- Supports a Constitutional Amendment for school prayer.
- Voted NO on campaign finance reform banning soft-money contributions. (Feb 2002)
- Voted NO on banning soft money and issue ads. (Sep 1999)
- Unlimited campaign contributions; with full disclosure. (Dec 2000)
- Abolish federal Medicare entitlement; leave it to states. (Dec 2000)
- Rated 56% by APHA, indicating a mixed record on public health issues. (Dec 2003)
- Voted YES on continuing intelligence gathering without civil oversight. (Apr 2006)
- Voted YES on continuing military recruitment on college campuses. (Feb 2005)
- Rated 67% by SANE, indicating a mixed record on military issues. (Dec 2003)
- Rated 100% by FAIR, indicating a voting record restricting immigration. (Dec 2003)
- Voted YES on zero-funding OSHA's Ergonomics Rules instead of $4.5B. (Mar 2001)
- Rated 47% by the AFL-CIO, indicating a mixed record on union issues. (Dec 2003)
- Voted NO on strengthening the Social Security Lockbox. (May 1999)
- Rated 30% by the ARA, indicating an anti-senior voting record. (Dec 2003)
- Voted NO on establishing "network neutrality" (non-tiered Internet). (Jun 2006)
This guy is, to put it mildly, schitzophrenic in many of his positions. He's not all bad, but he's sure no "Dream" either.
5 comments:
Why it's so important to get past the bluster and bull and arrive at the issues -- the true defining moments. This is what the media -- the blogs -- are for.
Great work TUC!
His voting record is much better than that list makes it seem - he'll vote against a seemingly "good" bill if he doesn't like some small part of it.
For instance, while he is pro-life, he wouldn't have a problem with an America where it was legal to have an abortion in Connecticut, but illegal in North Dakota- it's his position that it should be a state issue. Abortion is not something that the federal goverment has any right talking about.
Jason, that may be. I agree the Federal government should stay out of abortion issues -- but so should the states. I believe that a woman has the right to control her own body and nobody else has any business legislating whether or not she is entitled to have an abortion.
The problem with leaving it to the states is that that's essentially the way it was before Roe vs. Wade. It was the many women who lived in illegal abortion states and were permanently maimed or killed in back-alley abortions that led to Roe vs. Wade in the first place. I therefore find Paul's position on abortion untenable.
Then change the constitution to include a right to abortion.
Once you open the door an inch to allow in a good, you open it for all the bad that will come rushing in along with it.
My main problem with Ron Paul is he may be against big government but he has no problem with big corporations. to me they're just as bad if not worse (since you can't run them out of office)... he would do nothing to stop monopolies, who can really hold all of society back, like bell telephone did for decades until they got broken up.
furthermore, he would not have funded internet research (arpanet) nor does he believe the internet should remain fair and neutral. he would not mind if large corporations took it over and started to charge people $2.25 a minute to be online, like it used to be before the government internet came along.
so i find it highly ironic that there are all these supporters for ron paul from the internet, who don't even realize there would be no internet, if ron paul had his way.
Post a Comment