Ron Paul hates Tibet
So as you may have read here previously, I've never been the biggest Ron Paul fan.
The man wants to get rid of NASA, let people own fully-automatic assault weapons, decriminalize illegal drugs, withdraw from the United Nations, and return to the "gold standard" for our monetary system (when we don't have enough gold on the planet to cover even half of the money we currently have in circulation in the U.S.). And his answer to everything else is "uh....let the free market work itself out!"
In short, he is an anarchist, an isolationist and a nutcase. But I really didn't know he was this bad...
The U.S. House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed a resolution Wednesday calling on China to end its crackdown on Tibet and release Tibetans imprisoned for "nonviolent" demonstrations.
The vote was 413-1.
Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, who recently dropped out of the presidential race, was the lone congressman voting against it.
(http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/04/09/house.olympics/)
Shame on you, sir.
I am now convinced that this man, if elected, would have made the worst president of all time.
Maybe even including our current one.
»
Tags:
worst president ever? he
worst president ever? he probably would have been. but i think he atleast bring ups very interesting points.
he opposed what? a non-binding resolution? non-binding resolutions do jack sh#$. its a statement that says "we dont like what your doing, we are going to word that strongly, but we're not going to do anything about it"
so whether he was opposing this for the fact that non-binding resolutions are worthless or that we should keep our noses out of other countries foreign policy, niether point is that horrible.
yes he is an insane and deluded man, but sometimes those kind of people have a positve benefit.
I don't know
I personally am not too enthused about any of the big political candidates. Obama's inexperienced and seems to kinda be riding on popularity rather than addressing issues (IMO), Hilary's Hilary, McCain is not horrible and seems like he'd be a strong leader, but is against net neutrality and is a little flaky at times.
I think I might've liked Paul. He's got plenty of very strange and radical ideas, sure, but I think leaders should be willing to go against the grain rather than simply going with the flow and avoiding substantial disagreement like plenty of our political leaders do. I also see some merit to *not* getting involved in foreign politics. Sure, I agree that China should change this policy, but I think we get enough rap for stepping into foreign politics.
How could Ron Paul be the
How could Ron Paul be the worst president ever? Just because he supports a lot of things that may seem out there, that doesn't mean any of them will be accomplished. It's the principal of what he preaches not that more than half these things would actually get done. I think a majority of the country would greatly appreciate the abolishment of the IRS, a physical barrier on the Mexican border, and getting out of Iraq and many of the countries. The main focus' of Ron Paul are civil liberties and fiscal responsibilities. Anyone that thinks that would provide the worst president ever needs to seriously reassess what it means to be an American. I think the founding fathers, without a doubt, would be more then happy with someone like Ron Paul becoming president in the times in which we live. Can you imagine what the founding fathers would think if they saw the ideals Obama holds? Higher taxes? Nationalized healthcare? Support for nationalizing oil? Support to nationalize anything?!?! It's scary how many americans find Ron Paul 'crazy' when in reality, he is the founding fathers savior, if you will. He strictly follows the constitution, the man doesn't allow his children to have subsidized loans from the government for their education because they are tax-payed subsidies. He even rejected his congressional pension. I don't think you will find a more fit man that practices, literally, what he preaches. Ooo and i did mention he's a politician?