Ron Paul Facts
Some interesting facts that you may (or may not know) about Ron Paul:
Ron Paul first ran for President in 1988, as a Libertarian, despite having no previous affiliation with the party. Silly Libertarians will let any kook run.
Ron Paul enables trutherism; the lowest for of conspiracy mongering by wanting a pointless new investigation. He's on the same level as Kucinich in this regard.
Ron Paul's job in the House has been, primarily, to keep his seat warm.
Ron Paul has had 312 sponsored bills die in committee during his House tenure, which gets him a terrible rating when compared to his peers.
Ron Paul has never sponsored a bill, gotten others to agree with him, gotten it out of committee had it passed and signed into law. This display of leadership clearly makes him qualified to lead the country.
Ron Paul isn't even really a libertarian. He has voted for government funding of education, health care, and has voted against gun rights.
Ron Paul doesn't like the Constitution, obviously.
Despite polling very well online, Ron Paul cannot pass 1% in a respectable nation-wide poll. Maybe it means one type of poll is wrong. Wonder which it is?
Ron Paul supporters act like lemmings even when they are told to act like lemmings.
Ron Paul supporters are really truthers, and over 90% of his support comes from truthers.
Ron Paul hasn't distinguished himself as a Representative; why should anyone vote for him as President?
Even Ron Paul thinks that's stupid; and that's saying a lot!
Democrats love Ron Paul on stage, because he makes everyone else a little more kooky as well.
Must be a conspiracy to keep Ron Paul out of office, as there is no logical reason to be opposed to this time tested leader.
UPDATE!
Ron Paul is in the pockets of Big Oil (in my scary voice):
Voted YES on scheduling permitting for new oil refinieries. (Jun 2006) Voted NO on passage of the Bush Administration national energy policy. (Jun 2004) Voted NO on implementing Bush-Cheney national energy policy. (Nov 2003) Voted NO on raising CAFE standards; incentives for alternative fuels. (Aug 2001) Voted NO on prohibiting oil drilling & development in ANWR. (Aug 2001) Voted NO on starting implementation of Kyoto Protocol. (Jun 2000) Repeal the gas tax. (May 2001)
Given that his district is the Gulf Coast of Texas (where the refineries and oil platforms are); this is not surprising is it? Big Oil. Ron Paul.
May 25th, 2007 - 23:16
90% are truthers…wow! What an amazing “fact”….I can only imagine where you get your rock hard facts. Your little smear post is cute, ignorant, and illinformed. He follows the Constitution more than any rep. His nickname is Dr. No…because he votes “no” on any issue non constitutional…witch means he shows up participates and “votes”
I’m glad that I get to be one of the first replies to your bogus feces flung “facts”…You make me laugh.
May 26th, 2007 - 00:22
Yes, all those votes go along with what his policy is on free trade, and less government meddling…I suggest to take a look at “all the lobbying money he took from those oil companies ZERO…He follows the constitution as written. What you fail to report in your smear campaign, is that he also voted NO to all subsidies to the same oil companies..What I think you fail to understand is that those are either ” entangling alliances”..or issues that should be for state governments to decide on. He follows the constitution, and has said many many times, that if you want to make laws that conflict with the constitution, you must first “amend it” thats his whole point….you must follow the law, or Government liberties go to far, spend to much..or could even lead to an unconstitutional political war, but hey, that could “NEVER HAPPEN” right?. The constitution is not a “guideline”it is the law, and any law outside of it should require a vote for an amendment to make it legal.
May 26th, 2007 - 01:17
tenure
not
tenor
June 7th, 2007 - 11:25
This post is exactly right, most of his supporters are 9/11 truther lunatics. And I mean straight up, prozac using, formally (or possibly continuiously) institutionalized, beyond-anything-you-have-ever-experienced before psychotics.
June 8th, 2007 - 22:57
Gee, didn’t the “truther” propaganda play it self out last month? Get with the times Ray! The current smear campaign is 90% of Ron Paul supporters are potheads!
Please join us in considering Congressman Ron Paul for President.
June 17th, 2007 - 19:57
I would consider these lies about Ron Paul voting for gun control and for education on the verge of libel. Those are absolute 100% lies. If they are true please provide the links to the .gov website. Your journalistic skills are worse than a monkey.
June 17th, 2007 - 21:01
As you wish:
http://www.ontheissues.org/TX/Ron_Paul.htm#Gun_Control
Voted NO on prohibiting suing gunmakers & sellers for gun misuse. (Apr 2003)
Voted NO on decreasing gun waiting period from 3 days to 1. (Jun 1999)
http://www.ontheissues.org/TX/Ron_Paul.htm#Education
Voted NO on requiring states to test students. (May 2001)
Voted NO on allowing vouchers in DC schools. (Aug 1998)
Supports a Constitutional Amendment for school prayer. (May 1997)
Are you sure you know your candidate?
June 18th, 2007 - 22:13
My good sir, you may want to examine your claims more carefully. You claimed that he voted AGAINST gun rights. No, he voted NO so as to follow the Constitution (see Second Amendment of the United States Constitution, not the Bizarro Constitution) by not giving the federal government more power over individual gun rights.
My good sir, you also claimed he voted FOR funding education…but ironically (or idiotically) in both of your examples he clearing voted NOT to federally fund education. This also follows the non-Bizarro Constitution (see Ninth and Tenth Amendments).
Finally my good sir, you have a problem with his prayer in school stance. He supports PROTECTING both free speech and freedom of religion by protecting the right to prayer in school, not mandatory prayer (see First Amendment of non-Bizarro Constitution).
June 19th, 2007 - 09:03
Did you read the links? I don’t think so.
He voted -against- reducing the waiting period from 3 days to 1. Where is a waiting period in the constitution? Come on, the Champion of the Constitution isn’t reading things into it, is he?
He also voted against preventing victims from suing gun-makers. Remind me how the gunmaker is responsible for who gets shot?
School Prayer is an irrelevant issue; but its not a free speech issue. Schools should not be dictating a period for prayer for anyone in school. If you allow prayer in schools, you have to allow all religions to do what they want. This means muslims get to pray 5 times a day in school, JW’s get to preach to all the students in school. If you think this is what school is for, you need to reconsider your thoughts on education.
He also voted against vouchers for private schools. This is an endorsement of publically funded education. Taxpayer funds going to education, which – by all evidence – is better handled by private institutions.
July 13th, 2007 - 13:05
I realize this is a very old post, but I’d just like to point out that your logic is seriously flawed. A vote against vouchers for private schools is NOT, by any stretch, an endorsement of public education.
In addition, picking out little things from bills he voted against ignores the big picture; that all regulation of waiting periods is dumb, therefore ANY regulation of waiting periods is dumb, etc. These are his arguments. I think they’re correct.
October 6th, 2007 - 02:26
Wow, this is one of, if not the most uninformed, misleading and straight up lying hit pieces I have seen.
First off, Ron Paul has NEVER voted against gun rights…ever. He has written more bills to expand gun rights, and remove the restriction we already have, then McCarthy has trying to take them away.
This…
“Ron Paul supporters are really truthers, and over 90% of his support comes from truthers.”
Makes you just look REALLY dumb. And clearly shows you have not a clue about which you speak.
October 30th, 2007 - 18:21
made all that up as you went, didnt you. you never checked one ‘fact’, to busy trying to spell. this is slander & you are liable. every single one isnt only wrong, its fabricated. dr. pauls supporters are crazy? well, crazy enough to sue you for slander i guess.
December 3rd, 2007 - 00:11
WTF?
yeah well if you actually researched you would know that a true libertarian doesnt support gun control at all!
IDIOT!
Ron Paul is a great man.
He will be president.
just wait.
You know who the military supporst the most out of all the major candidates from both sides? You guessed it, Ron Paul! = D
[]
December 4th, 2007 - 19:55
Then paul isn’t a libertarian, is he?
He voted -for- background checks at gun shows. He also voted to increase penalties for those who use large magazines during crimes (as if clip size makes the crime any worse). He also voted no on decreasing the waiting period in DC from 3 days to 1.
So he’s not a libertarian, I guess.
I’d suggest you modify your “military support” statement to say “from people wh o declare their employment” This is not verified information, as far as I know. All you have to do is select “military” on your donation form and you get the designation automatically. Without going through every donation, it’s really hard to make this claim intelligently.
December 24th, 2007 - 05:05
WOW, if %90 of his supporters are ‘truthers’ (potheads) then that is where the money is! Maybe the rest of the candidates should tap into this unseen pothead pool of money.
The last two elections were fixed, what should make this one any different. Diebold baby, proving Stalin right!
January 15th, 2008 - 19:02
“He has voted for government funding of education, health care, and has voted against gun rights.”
Now I know your full of shit, haha, very amuseing
January 15th, 2008 - 19:02
“He has voted for government funding of education, health care, and has voted against gun rights.”
Now I know your full of it, haha, very amuseing
January 29th, 2008 - 14:16
“truthers” you say that like its a bad thing
maybe people like finding out what really happened.
but i guess in your world the government is your knight in shining armor that could do no harm and will protect you and your rights as long as your live.
go back to fox news and quit writing useless information
January 29th, 2008 - 20:20
Are you trying the IMAO tactic of Paul-baiting just to have the Google-baiting Ronulans swarm your site? We already know they have nothing better to do that hit search engines every 30 seconds for anything that might possibly disparage their Lord and Saviour. (Oh, and Ronulans…believe it or not, you are not helping your case. YA RLY)
Oh, and Bob: the “truther” label is something called propaganda. They aren’t so much concerned about the actual truth (i.e., what we in the scientific community like to call facts) as they are about what they like to believe is ‘The Truth’.
Most sane folks call these kinds of people kooks. And you know what? They’re right.
January 30th, 2008 - 15:20
This post has to be a joke. Right? Proof Dr. Paul is in big oil’s pocket…that’s a joke right? Surely the author is being witty and clever.
Because it is widely known that lobbyist do not even stop by Dr. Paul’s office, ever.
Many of his bills never get passed because he doesn’t trade votes. He votes on principle period. That is not popular currently.
The people of his district love him enough to re-elect him ten times.
Finally, I’m not a truther.
April 9th, 2008 - 12:38
“Ron Paul isn’t even really a libertarian. He has voted for government funding of education, health care, and has voted against gun rights.
Ron Paul doesn’t like the Constitution, obviously.”
Please show me the actual legislation he’s voted in favor or against to prove this.
GovTrack.us is an excellent tool to find it.
April 17th, 2008 - 16:35
wow. youre probably one of the most ignorant and arrogant people i’ve ever heard of. why dont you actually do some research so you know what youre talking about. you’re just embarrassing yourself by bashing him. hes one of the most honest and best politicians we’ve ever had. so learn your facts before you start talking shit.