[PAA-Discuss] but is he REALLY against the war? (about ron paul)

Tue Nov 13 21:34:45 EST 2007

Dear Zappa2004,

  I don't mind posts that offer viewpoints of Ron Paul (or of any other candidate). I happen to believe that civil discourse and honest discussion about issues and candidates is a great thing. And, I also happen to disagree with Ron Paul on some issues. Nonetheless, I find it ABSOLUTELY UNACCEPTABLE AND INEXCUSABLE for you to intentionally resort to fabrication, lies, distortion, and misinformation to further your opinions. This really upsets me. It is appalling to me that you (and others, including Progressive Punch) would deliberately twist the truth and mislead others about Ron Paul's positions on the war in Iraq .

  Before you (and others on this list) resort to hot-hotheadedness and begin attacking me,
  Let’s put the following into perspective:

  You say that "Each of the 11 Democrats who are running for President has a far better record on the issue than Ron Paul does, even Shillary Clinton."  C’mon. Do you think we’re that stupid? You’re going to have to try harder than THAT if you want to deceive us about Ron Paul’s record.

  How can Joe Biden, of all people, score any higher than Ron Paul in terms of opposition to the war? This is preposterous! Joe Biden voted IN FAVOR OF AUTHORIZING THE INVASION AND OCCUPATION OF IRAQ! Ron Paul voted AGAINST the war. Joe Biden has consistently (and continues to do so) voted IN FAVOR OF FUNDING THE WAR. Ron Paul has consistently (and continues to do so) voted AGAINST funding the war and has voted AGAINST the supplemental appropriations bills that keep the war going.

  How can Hillary Clinton score any higher than Ron Paul in terms of opposition to the war? This is preposterous! Hillary Clinton voted IN FAVOR OF AUTHORIZING THE INVASION AND OCCUPATION OF IRAQ! Ron Paul voted AGAINST the war. Hillary Clinton has consistently (up until recently, for egotistical reasons) voted IN FAVOR OF FUNDING THE WAR. Ron Paul has consistently (and continues to do so) voted AGAINST funding the war and has voted AGAINST the supplemental appropriations bills that keep the war going.

  How can Christopher Dodd score higher than Ron Paul in terms of opposition to the war? This is preposterous! Chris Dodd voted IN FAVOR OF AUTHORIZING THE INVASION AND OCCUPATION OF IRAQ! Ron Paul voted AGAINST the war. Chris Dodd has consistently (up until recently, for egotistical reasons) voted IN FAVOR OF FUNDING THE WAR. Ron Paul has consistently (and continues to do so) voted AGAINST funding the war and has voted AGAINST the supplemental appropriations bills that keep the war going.

  In addition, are you forgetting about the possible martial confrontation with Iran ? ALL OF THE DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATES (except Kucinich, of course) that you claim have a “far better record” on issues of war/peace than Ron Paul refuse to stand in strong opposition to bombing Iran. ALL OF THE DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATES you claim have a “far better record” on issues of war/peace than Ron Paul refuse to reject the option of aggressive war against Iran . Meanwhile, unlike the Democratic candidates that you claim are better than Ron Paul on foreign policy, Ron Paul is STRONGLY OPPOSED to a confrontation with Iran and he rejects all moves toward war with Iran .

  I’m sorry, Zappa2004, but your post on Ron Paul is deeply incoherent, inconsistent, illogical, and, frankly, quite absurd. Oh, and on the site that you included a link to in your post (progressive punch), corporate-favoring, Republican-Lite, shady Democrats like Jane Harman, Nick Lampson, Rahm Emanuel, Nancy Pelosi, and Henry Waxman all score HIGHER than both Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul, who are both anti-war stalwarts. Even self-labeled conservative Democrats like Tim Mahoney of Florida and Henry Cuellar (who was appointed TX secretary of state back when Dubya was governor) score HIGHER than Dennis Kucinich!!!!  This is insane! These rankings are completely FUCKED UP! This site and its rankings are A PIECE OF SHIT! How are we supposed to trust a site with problematic, fraudulent information of this sort!

  In addition, through the website you include and the information you cite, you claim that the “supplemental appropriations bill for the ongoing war in Iraq ” is a progressive piece of legislation and that Ron Paul is wrong in voting against this. How is this so? Since when was funding the war “progressive?” BOTH Ron Paul AND Dennis Kucinich voted against this bill. So, are they wrong in doing so? Is Dennis K not progressive for also rejecting this legislation?

  Finally, Ron Paul chose not to vote for H.R. 2956 because it called for a gradual pullout of U.S. troops in order to have them home by April 2008. This is NOT what I want, nor is it what I think most people on this list support. I WANT ALL OF OUR TROOPS OUT OF IRAQ IMMEDIATELY. I WANT THE U.S. TO START BRINGING THEM HOME NOW! Ron Paul shares this view, and THAT is why he didn’t vote in favor of this bill. He supports the immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq and demands that they be brought home NOW. That’s why he didn’t support H.R. 2956. Might I mention that Dennis Kucinich also did NOT favor this bill for the same reasons that Ron Paul didn’t.

  So, you see, Ron Paul is wholeheartedly against the war. Like Kucinich, he has been against it since the beginning. And, best of all, Ron Paul refuses to play games with the lives of our troops and supports the IMMEDIATE WITHDRAWAL OF ALL MILITARY FORCES FROM IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN.

  Zappa2004, you cannot distort the facts. I am sick and tired of people trying to tear down Ron Paul’s record on the war with misinformation and fabrication. It’s disgraceful and it doesn’t work. Let's have a real, honest discussion about the issues and the records of candidates. Let's NOT deceive people by twisting facts to favor our opinions. Let's not develop incorrect perceptions abundant and become victims of the lack of knowledge.

  Sincerely,
  Ivan Espinosa
  832-231-2002

zappa2004 at earthlink.net wrote:

    #yiv1420895969   {MARGIN-TOP:25px;FONT-SIZE:10pt;MARGIN-LEFT:25px;COLOR:#000000;FONT-FAMILY:Arial, Helvetica;}#yiv1420895969 P.msoNormal {MARGIN-TOP:0px;FONT-SIZE:10pt;MARGIN-LEFT:0px;COLOR:#ffffcc;FONT-FAMILY:Helvetica, "Times New Roman";}#yiv1420895969 LI.msoNormal {MARGIN-TOP:0px;FONT-SIZE:10pt;MARGIN-LEFT:0px;COLOR:#ffffcc;FONT-FAMILY:Helvetica, "Times New Roman";}      Please read the article and check out the links to voting record!

  Are we so focused on the war that we are willing to hear what we want to hear, ignore all else, and gloss over the bad parts of a candidate? As you dig into who Ron Paul is, you see that he actually has a very mixed voting record on the war. What Paul said, in the context of his voting record, sounds great but it is not the same as actually being against the war, and it's not nitpicking to say so. His words contradict his voting record. That contradiction gets to the core of who this candidate is. Haven't we had enough deception and doublespeak?

  Let's take a look at Rep. Paul's Iraq vote record first. Yes. It's a fact that his voting record on Iraq is better than any of the Repugs he shared the stage with at their debate, but is that so hard? That, together with his words on the subject are a big part of what has excited many people of all political persuasions about him. If only they took the time to find out another few facts: 1) Each of the 11 Democrats who are running for President has a far better record on the issue than Ron Paul does, even Shillary Clinton, who I also don't plan on voting for. 2) He has voted WITH BUSH/CHENEY on the matter close to 20 TIMES! 3) In addition, he has voted neither yes or no but "present" (or absented himself numerous other times). It's real easy to say you voted against the war when you don't have to get specific about what the specific bills were actually about. It's also real easy to say you voted against a war bill when you don't mention that you also voted for so many
 others, or even fail to mention that you cowardly decided not to even show up, just so you can say you didn't vote for something. Talk about your cynical, disingenuous politicians! Not only that, but Paul believers claim to love him for being a man who stands on principle. Too bad he's so damn selective and part time about it.

  and more article with link to voting record:  

  http://downwithtyranny.blogspot.com/2007/08/about-ron-paul-enemy-of-my-enemy-is-not.html

---------------------------------
Get easy, one-click access to your favorites.  Make Yahoo! your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://paa-tx.org/pipermail/discuss_paa-tx.org/attachments/20071113/79a74e45/attachment.htm>