Once again, Ron Paul singles himself out by casting the only no vote on a sense-of-the-House resolution that seems like a no-brainer:
Tuesday night, Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) was the only member of the House of Representatives to vote against [a] resolution conveying “condolences and sympathy” to the people in Myanmar affected by deadly Cyclone Nargis. It’s not all that surprising of a move for a guy who earned the nickname “Dr. No” by so frequently refusing to march along with the parade of feel-good legislative acts that often dominates the days of our Congress. (The resolution, it should be noted, doesn’t actually do anything for the people suffering in Myanmar.)
But that doesn’t mean that there aren’t some truly important resolutions that even Dr. No feels compelled to vote “yes” on:
• The University of Kansas football team for “winning the 2008 FedEx Orange Bowl and having the most successful year in program history”
• The New York Giants for “winning Super Bowl XLII and completing one of the most remarkable post-season runs in professional sports history”
• The Louisiana State University football team for winning the 2007 Bowl Championship Series national championship game
Apparently, cheering for American sports teams is more important than mourning for dead Burmese.
May 16th, 2008 at 9:47 am
Perhaps you should read the text of the legislation that he voted “NO” on.
It doesn’t just express “condolences and sympathy.”
It intervenes in the affairs of the government of Burma:
“Whereas Burma’s military regime did little to warn the people and is not providing adequate humanitarian assistance to address basic needs and prevent further loss of life;
Whereas despite the devastation, the military regime has announced plans to go ahead with its May 10, 2008, referendum on a sham constitution, delaying voting only in portions of the affected Irrawaddy region and Rangoon;
Whereas the military regime has failed to provide life-protecting and life-sustaining services to its people.
And, as usual with American foreign policy, it goes even further and makes a demand to their government:
“(6) demands that the referendum to entrench military rule be called off, allowing all resources to be focused on disaster relief to ease the pain and suffering of the Burmese people.”
May 16th, 2008 at 9:49 am
Yea so ?
The Burmese Generals have arrogantly been allowing their citizens to die and going ahead with an obviously rigged referendum that will be even easier to rig with the country devastated.
I guess the r3volution is for Americans only, huh ?
May 16th, 2008 at 1:20 pm
Oh, boohoo. He voted no on expressing sympathy to a country that wants nothing of the sort. He is only respecting the wishes of their government, and avoiding angering a country which has repeatedly announced their wishes to be free of outside interference.
They don’t want to feel that they owe us anything. Is that so hard to understand?
May 16th, 2008 at 1:28 pm
Respecting the wishes of their government
You do realize this is a bunch of self-appointed, murdering dictators we’re talking about, right ?
Since when do they deserve any respect ?
May 16th, 2008 at 4:26 pm
Doug,
If this really truly bothers you, please use your own money to send to the victims of the disaster.
While you’re at it, join one of the few “Peace” agencies that are currently allowed to enter Myanmar.
DON’T Force a country to allow foreign interference when they do not want it.
DON’T Pass ‘resolutions’ that will make the American tax payer finance and become liable for that which happens there.
So Saddam used mustard gas on his people and that was enough reason to invade them. Myanmar won’t take care of their people so… we’re supposed to invade them too? And don’t say it won’t be an invasion because that’s the only way that we’ll get in there - without their approval.
How long do you want our country to keep fighting wars that are not ours to fight?
People these days. Not only do they want the American government to run their lives, but everyone else’s too - even if it’s outside of our borders and jurisdiction.
May 16th, 2008 at 4:30 pm
And how long do you want your supposed hero to vote yes on a meaningless resolution about college football while he refuses to take a stand against a true dictatorship ?
May 16th, 2008 at 4:47 pm
Not sure if you noticed, but 1 out of the 4 that you listed is different than the rest. That’s right, it’s outside of our borders.
Get this through your head. Our government wasn’t set up to patrol the globe or help everyone out. As warm and fuzzy as it makes you feel to “Save people from communism” or throw our cash at them, it’s not correct. Until we do have a Unified World Government, it’s not our responsibility, and frankly, I’m sure everyone else in the world wishes that people like you would understand that.
Now you, Mr. I Just Want to Help the People of the World, why the hell don’t you get off your ass and do something then? Or is personally attacking Ron Paul about issues that you disagree with your idea of making the world a better place? You have your motives, your intentions, and you actions tied in a very constricting knot. Your words mean nothing.
May 16th, 2008 at 4:52 pm
So Dr. No doesn’t care about Burmese suffering under the thumb of a dictator enough to even say “I condemn it”, huh ?
And yet, yea for the LSU Tigers !
Typical politician, like I’ve always suspected.
May 16th, 2008 at 5:06 pm
It’s not just saying “I condemn it,” it’s (as stated previously in this conversation) “(6) demands that the referendum to entrench military rule be called off, allowing all resources to be focused on disaster relief to ease the pain and suffering of the Burmese people.”
Yes, it’s a demand.
What gives us right to demand entry into their government?
Picture this. Israel has a terrible natural disaster, but they don’t want anyone inside of their borders. It’s understandable, considering that most of their neighbors are considered enemies. Iran, however, doesn’t see how Israel wouldn’t want help from a neighbor. So they send a “Demand” to enter the country to help the people.
Does that seem ok with you?
Or even in Myanmar’s situation. If Iran or North Korea were putting a bunch of pressure on the government to allow them entrance - would you be cool with that? I’m assuming no. So why is it ok if we do it?
Like I said previously, he’s making decisions for our country, not the rest of the world. He obviously supports education and athletics within our borders - is that a bad thing? Education makes for a more intelligent population. Athletics keep our population healthy and it’s economically favorable in our country.
So, Mr. Doug, how many people voted against the LSU, University of Kansas, or New York Giants resolutions? Because, well frankly, you’re making it seem like the good Dr. Paul is the only one who voted for it.
May 16th, 2008 at 5:29 pm
Bruno,
This is Dr. No we’re talking about, who used to claim to vote against all those meaningless resolutions.
I smell hypocrisy.
And for you to call what exists in Yangon a legitimate government is, quite honestly, outrageous. We don’t have to invade them, but we don’t have to accept them either.
May 16th, 2008 at 5:30 pm
I don’t know if this is your job or if you’re just terribly bored, but if you want to be taken seriously as a journalist, cut the crap, cut the slander, and write with a less biased and hateful hand.
We have enough crappy reporters.
May 16th, 2008 at 5:31 pm
Bruno,
Who said I was a journalist.
I’m just a guy who doesn’t bow down and offer prayers at the altar of St. Ron of Paul.
May 16th, 2008 at 5:36 pm
“We don’t have to invade them, but we don’t have to accept them either.”
What exactly do you mean by that?
We don’t have to accept them? As in.. we don’t have to allow them in our country? Sure, that sounds reasonable.
Or do you mean “We don’t have to accept them,” as it is our right to demand entry into their country because we do not agree with their government?
The Bush administration’s approval ratings stand at almost a measly 20%. 80% of our population does not agree with the way our country is being run. Does that give China the authority to demand entry to our country?
May 16th, 2008 at 5:39 pm
We don’t have to accept them as reasonable people. Because they aren’t.
They are totalitarian dictators who are more interested in letting their people die than allowing outsiders into the country.
I’m not talking about demanding entry. I’m talking about taking a moral stand against evil.
Which Ron Paul, apparently, refuses to do.
May 16th, 2008 at 5:41 pm
No, you’re not a guy who doesn’t bow down to Ron Paul. You’re a guy that, for one reason or another, wants to make it a goal to defame a guy that has done nothing wrong except make sense and gather plenty of support. Ron Paul has the *Best* voting record of ANYONE in congress. He warned us of the cost of the Iraq war before it actually happened and people blew him off. Do you want to continue doing this to a guy who made sense back then and continues to make sense?
The only guy out of ALL of congress who has enough respect for the people of this country to actually read these ‘Resolutions’ to their full extent before joining the rest of the crowd in voting “Yes?”
I can understand if you don’t agree with all of his policies and that’s fine. Your opinion is wonderful and I’ll accept it as so - but why do you have to make a special blog simply to smear his name?
May 16th, 2008 at 5:45 pm
“I’m not talking about demanding entry.”
That is EXACTLY what you are talking about!
“(6) demands that the referendum to entrench military rule be called off, allowing all resources to be focused on disaster relief to ease the pain and suffering of the Burmese people.”
And then you make fun or Ron Paul for voting “No” on it.
Explain to me - how are you NOT talking about DEMANDING entry?
Sure, I agree. If we don’t like the way they treat their people, we should try to talk to them. I agree with you 10000% on that point. But making a resolution to DEMAND ENTRY INTO THEIR COUNTRY is just the opposite. How do you not see this?
May 16th, 2008 at 6:12 pm
Oh yeah. I almost forgot. Be the better man. http://www.givetoburma.org/
May 16th, 2008 at 6:26 pm
Bruno,
More like point out the flaws in a man who has done nothing.
And I’ve taken care of private charity privately, which is the way it should be. So, butt out.
May 16th, 2008 at 6:55 pm
Why don’t you spend time pointing out flaws in people who have done something you disagree with?
If Ron Paul has done nothing - why are you still arguing with me about a man who is so insignificant? It’s because he has done something. He has gained support and opened the eyes of many a people. Enough that when such people see his name being smeared for no good reason, we like to stand up for him.
Thank you for the conversation, Mr. Mataconis. I’ll be sure to keep an eye out for your name.
May 18th, 2008 at 8:08 am
Ron Paul is not a libertarian. He’s a complete embarrassment to the entire libertarian movement. Libertarians fully favor human rights. We do not side with the forces of tyrynny nor murder.
This vote was the last straw. We libertarians should work from now on to distance ourselves from this man at every opportunity. If you see the word “libertarian” associated with Paul in some major media reference, or on some blog, please take a moment to write a quick letter to the editor, saying that Paul is not a libertarian, but rather a neo-isolationist populist leftwinger, who at one time flirted with our movement but is not longer a member. I do this on a daily basis. Thanks.
Eric Dondero, Fmr. Senior Aide
US Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX)
1997-2003
May 22nd, 2008 at 6:51 pm
You’re right about one thing, Eric - he’s a Republican, not a Libertarian as most label him. He was a Republican before running on the Libertarian ticket in ‘88 and he is still a Republican.
Regardless, however, your argument is completely backwards from the link on your name. The link that your name takes us to identifies the basis of Ron Paul’s platform. The only difference is that you guys are excited that McCain is considering one of two “Libertarian-Leaners” for the VP slot.
Ron Paul has enough dignity to stay the hell away from scum like McCain.
May 22nd, 2008 at 7:15 pm
Bruno,
Paul has called himself a libertarian on more than one occasion.