Ron Paul Challenges Democrats Who Support an Obama War Over a Bush War

Ron PaulRon Paul has challenged democrats for what he views as their hypocrisy in voting against the war funding during the Bush Administration while now voting for same legislation under the Obama Administration.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this conference report on the War Supplemental Appropriations. I wonder what happened to all of my colleagues who said they were opposed to the ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. I wonder what happened to my colleagues who voted with me as I opposed every war supplemental request under the previous administration. It seems, with very few exceptions, they have changed their position on the war now that the White House has changed hands. I find this troubling. As I have said while opposing previous war funding requests, a vote to fund the war is a vote in favor of the war. Congress exercises its constitutional prerogatives through the power of the purse.

In the meantime, the ACLU has sued TSA over its arrest and detention of Paul’s treasurer, here.

For more on his speech, click here.

36 thoughts on “Ron Paul Challenges Democrats Who Support an Obama War Over a Bush War”

  1. George Washington,

    you may be the father of our country, but you are insane in your political views if you think ron Paul is a savior, or can even win the Republican nomination.

  2. Mr. Ron Paul for 2012.

    Regan said, “What to ask is am I better off now than 4 years ago. Is food cheaper now than 4 years ago? Are taxes lower now than 4 years ago? Is the job situation better than it was 4 years ago?”

    With Ron Paul’s 2012, You, it, and they would be.
    Constitutionally, legislatively, and morally, Ron Paul has no equal. His 22 year voting record speaks for itself.
    As Mr. Regan said, “You ain’t seen nothin yet!”

  3. Typo sorry.

    To (bring) the troops home they should NOT have voted for War-Funding. Liars! Murderers!

    Funding these illegal wars is criminal. Those who voted for funding are War Criminals!

  4. Jeremy Scahill addresses the idea that this funding is different because it’s for ending the wars:

    “New York Democrat Anthony Weiner, who voted against the war funding in May—when it didn’t matter—only to vote Tuesday with the pro-war Dems, sounded like an imbecile when he made this statement after the vote: “We are in the process of wrapping up the wars. The president needed our support.” What planet is Weiner living on? “Wrapping up the wars?” Last time I checked, there are 21,000 more US troops heading to Afghanistan alongside a surge in contractors there, including a 29% increase in armed contractors. Does Weiner think the $106 billion in war funding he voted for is going to pay for one way tickets home for the troops? What he voted for was certainly not the “Demolition of the 80 Football-field-size US Embassy in Baghdad Act of 2009.” To cap off this idiocy, Weiner basically admitted he is a fraud when he said the bill he voted in favor of “still sucks.”

    (found at rebel reports)

  5. Paul is an anti-choice Libertarian who attaches earmarks to bills, then votes against them (knowing they will be passed). He is strange. Maybe the only Republican with independent thoughts.

    However, on the point of war funding, the model is too simplistic. Voting for funding operations in Iraq in 2009 is different that voting for them in 2008 (or earlier). A vote for funding in 2003-8 was a vote for unending occupation and war against the “terrorists”. A vote for funding in 2009, is a vote to move ahead with the withdrawal of troops on a schedule agreed to by all parties.

    Democrats voted (generally) against unending war in Iraq last year. Republicans voted for it. This year, Dems voted to allow operations to continue knowing plans are in place to leave. Republicans don’t want to leave, so voted against it.

  6. Indentured Servant,

    Thank you. I can read your posts now instead of skipping over them by default.

  7. Most all of congress from as far back as 2003 should be in prison for initiating and funding the illegal wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and murders in Pakistan.

    War-funding kills and maims our troops.

    The U.S. Government has violated the same law used to prosecute and convict the Nazis at the Nuremberg Trials. The world rightfully sees the U.S. Government as Nazi terrorists and torturers.

  8. The only politician I’ve met who was “right” almost 100% of the time was Paul Wellstone. He wasn’t a kook nor did he allow himself to be marginalized. My son picked his college in part because of Wellstone’s affiliation with it.

  9. Mike,

    I do like one other thing about Paul. His stance on the IRS and tax code. Maybe that’s his other stop on the clock?

  10. Just as a stopped clock is correct twice a day, Ron Paul is correct on one issue, the War. My chief complaint about him is that he calls himself a “libertarian” but is anti-choice. This dichotomy is philosophically intolerable and shows that he is
    also adept at political posturing, but in a slightly different format.

  11. Oh I said it could be a sign. You inferred you have a problem because you exhibited the symptom. Good. Admitting you have a problem is the first step to getting help.

    You should really learn when to walk away.

  12. BIL:

    I was just changing the wording to make it more family friendly.

    There you go again with the attacks, now I am mentally ill? Do you know any other method of discourse?

  13. Repetitive behavior can be a sign of mental illness. Saying the same thing over and over will not, however, make it true.

  14. Former Federal Leo:

    is this better?
    I will refrain from barnyard language hence forth. But what better term to use for the perpetrators and recipients of the Terror. Both sides were foul and malodorous.


    “Well, if you think the French wanted their pound of flesh after the Revolution, you ain’t seen nothin’ yet. We’re a much nastier lot on the whole than the French could ever aspire to be.”

    oh that’s good, now fomenting revolution. The French revolution was a bunch of trash throwing a bunch of trash out. What are you that little intellectual giant Robespierre? Who’s your Rousseau, Mao Tse Tung?

    We can call you the dictateur sanguinaire if you like.

Comments are closed.