Why didn't Ron Paul vote against the NDAA?

Originally posted by Tea4One
reply to post by muzzleflash

 

I just forget you can't say a bad thing about Dr. Paul, because once hes president everything will be wonderful again

You really need to stop playing the "victim" here. As far as I can read, no one in this thread is blatantly attacking you for posting a "negative" about Ron Paul. It's clear you certainly expect a wave of negative backlash, which you may later receive, but that Tsunami isn't here yet. I wonder if it will ever arrive.

Maybe because he's a congressman and not a senator.

Only the senate has voted on it. Ron's son Rand voted against it.

Why would anyone think pro for the NDAA?

I showed that he didn't vote at all, with facts. Is that not good enough?

Im not playing the victim. I just know you can't say anything bad about Ron Paul otherwise the legions of fans on this website will come. As evident with the other thread I made... which to be fair, was more deserving of a backlash.

The shocking thing is, out of all the candidates, Ron Paul is the best one. Just shows my thoughts on every other candidate

Here's a better source. IDK what you posted but it's old and has no links. Check out Govtrack, a trusted source.

www.govtrack.us...

Here, you see. The house hasn't voted yet.

Originally posted by IndieA
Maybe because he's a congressman and not a senator.

Only the senate has voted on it. Ron's son Rand voted against it.

Well, if this weren't a roll call for the House, I could get behind that...this is a House vote, though.

Is it ALL legislation that originates in the House and is then sent to Senate for approval, or is that only required on financial bills and the senate can also introduce legislation for House approval? Both houses have to eventually approve any legislation that's sent to the president for passage into law.

reply to post by Tea4One


He may have been absent. I got curious about the number of "did not vote" marks on his record and went off to see how often he'd been absent -- he started out being present for almost everything and then he stopped showing up for a lot of things. There were a couple of times when he was absent for more than half the quarter even when he wasn't running for president. He averages about 12% absence rate.

Typically someone running for president also misses a lot of the votes because they're on the trail. But I feel pretty sure he wasn't in town for that vote.

This is just a very disingenuous attempt at attacking Ron Paul. How about the hundreds of congressmen and congresswoman that voted Yes on both the provision and the final bill? How about the Democratic challenger that signed it in to law?

Ron Paul is principled to a fault and to suggest that he should also abandon a debate to vote on a bill with near unanimous support from a bunch of traitorous scumbags is stretching it.

Ron Paul cannot change things alone but he can fulfill one promise. He can be the arbiter of a document of, as Obama put it, negative liberties. He can veto, for four years every other piece of trash like the NDAA that seeks to abuse the liberties of the American people. Thats the ONLY reason to vote for Ron Paul that anyone needs. He won't make money rain from the sky, but he will keep you out of jail for voicing your opinion - at least for four years...

reply to post by Tea4One
It's a good question and heck I want to know about things like this too. To be specific though, I think he was doing interviews for CNN (and maybe other networks) on the day of that NDAA vote, recall that he had a debate the next day to prepare for. Now if he had not voted, or voted aye on H.R. 1540, that would be something else

reply to post by IndieA


His link ends with a ".gov", so I would say it's good to go as far as a trusted source. Also, your link is good too but looks like the last update on the NDAA bill was 12/1/11

I am really shocked that he didn't make it for this vote... Having said that, he's running for president and he knew his vote wasn't going to make a difference... He's a busy guy. I can't fault him for this.

Click here for more information.

Ok, I apparently missed this vote. After looking into it more the NDAA was passed as HR 1540, and not HR 1867.

Here's the GOVTrack.

I'm a little confussed why there are 2 bills.

Originally posted by Sek82
Because he wasn't there that day. He did vote against HR 1540, which is the provision that everyone is upset over, right?

Vote On Passage: H.R. 1540

ETA: It's a good question, though. NDAA has to go through, but what matters is that he voted against the provision that is under scrutiny, and he was the only one from Texas to vote no out of their 32 representatives.

Interesting to note that almost all from Massachusetts voted no, while all of Alabama, Florida, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and all (except Ron Paul) from Texas voted aye. And one of only 6 Republicans that voted against it.

edit on 27-12-2011 by Sek82 because: ETA

Wait a minute, according to this he voted NO and Bachmann voted YES.

Ronald Paul.... Ronald... dunno why but it sounds funny

reply to post by Tea4One


So let me get this straight, Ron Paul has the most important GOP debate on the 15th in Iowa, the last debate before Iowa votes, with the most people watching, the one where he performed the best, and he is supposed to blow it off to vote in DC. Yeah that's some sound election advice. Back in reality, Ron Paul says this bill 'assures a descent in totalitarianism'. Hey tea4one, why don't you find us ANY cadidate besides Paul who said anything bad about this bill. YOU CAN'T. When you find us ANY cadidate who talked ill of this bill, let us know, otherwise save us the one sided spin.