[Peace-discuss] Ron Paul's support...

[John W.]

Your intellectual subalterns may be barking up altogether the wrong tree, 
Carl.  I have it on fairly good authority that you switched some years ago 
from caprine cultivation to bovine husbandry.  :-)


At 12:36 PM 11/12/2007, C. G. Estabrook wrote:

>I'm not sure how thoroughly my goat has been gotten, but the exchange has 
>ventilated what I take to be the crucial point: Paul's surprising success 
>in garnering money and support comes from his opposition to the war and 
>his call for the restoration of civil liberties, not from his economic 
>libertarianism.  People are supporting him because he's seen as not part 
>of the malign Democrat-Republican collusion that has reduced Congress' 
>approval rating below that of the president.
>
>Paul's bill to repeal the Military Commissions Act, restore Habeas corpus, 
>prohibit extraordinary rendition, and the use of secret evidence and 
>evidence obtained by torture (HR 3835) has yet to obtain any cosponsors, 
>Republican or Democrat, altho' Kucinich and others have cosponsored other 
>bills of Paul's.  --CGE
>
>
>Robert Naiman wrote:
>>
>>Well, this is pretty reasonable.
>>I was not really that outraged by Paul's vote. I just wanted to get
>>Carl's goat. It was a base motivation, and I regret it.
>>
>>On Nov 12, 2007 8:24 AM, Michael Shapiro <mshapiro51 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>This is direct from Ron Paul about the impeachment.
>>>
>>>http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=976
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Mr. Speaker, I rise, reluctantly, in favor of the motion to table House
>>>Resolution 799, Impeaching Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United
>>>States, of high crimes and misdemeanors, and in favor of referring that
>>>resolution to the House Judiciary Committee for full consideration. I voted
>>>to table this resolution not because I do not share the gentleman from
>>>Ohio's desire to hold those responsible for the Iraqi debacle accountable;
>>>but rather, because I strongly believe that we must follow established
>>>protocol in matters of such importance. During my entire time in Congress, I
>>>have been outspoken in my opposition to war with Iraq and Iran. I have
>>>warned my colleagues and the administration against marching toward war in
>>>numerous speeches over the years, and I have voted against every
>>>appropriation to continue the war on Iraq.
>>>
>>>I have always been strongly in favor of vigorous congressional oversight of
>>>the executive branch, and I have lamented our abrogation of these
>>>Constitutional obligations in recent times. I do believe, however, that this
>>>legislation should proceed through the House of Representatives following
>>>regular order, which would require investigation and hearings in the House
>>>Judiciary Committee before the resolution proceeds to the floor for a vote.
>>>This time-tested manner of moving impeachment legislation may slow the
>>>process, but in the long run it preserves liberty by ensuring that the House
>>>thoroughly deliberates on such weighty matters. In past impeachments of high
>>>officials, including those of Presidents Nixon and Clinton, the legislation
>>>had always gone through the proper committee with full investigation and
>>>accompanying committee report.
>>>
>>>I noted with some dismay that many of my colleagues who have long supported
>>>the war changed their vote to oppose tabling the motion for purely political
>>>reasons. That move was a disrespectful to the Constitutional function of
>>>this body and I could not support such actions with my vote.
>>>
>>>I was pleased that the House did vote in favor of sending this legislation
>>>to the Judiciary Committee, which essentially directs the committee to
>>>examine the issue more closely than it has done to this point.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>On Nov 6, 2007 9:44 PM, Robert Naiman <naiman.uiuc at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>Kucinich's impeachment bill against Cheney was voted twice on in the
>>>>House today.
>>>>
>>>>The Democratic leadership first tried to kill debate by tabling the
>>>>Kucinich bill. This failed, because a substantial minority of
>>>>Democrats was supported by a majority of Republicans in opposing the
>>>>Democratic leadership motion to table. Ron Paul voted with the
>>>>Democratic leadership and against both the Kucinich Democratic bloc
>>>>and the Republican majority to kill debate.
>>>>
>>>>Then the Democratic leadership sent the bill to die - at least so they
>>>>hope - at the Judiciary committee. This vote was almost entirely on
>>>>party lines. Overwhelmingly, Democrats voted to send the bill to
>>>>committee. Only 4 Democrats voted with Kucinich not to send the bill
>>>>to committee: Filner, Kaptur, Towns and Waters.
>>>>
>>>>Conversely, Republicans voted overwhelmingly against killing the bill
>>>>by sending it to committee. Only 4 Republicans voted with the
>>>>Democratic leadership to kill the Cheney impeachment bill.
>>>>
>>>>Who were those four Republicans? Well, one of them was Ron Paul.
>>>>
>>>>Ron Paul - Democratic Party Hack.
>>>>
>>>>1st vote:
>>>>http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll1037.xml
>>>>
>>>>2nd vote:
>>>>http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll1039.xml