0 votes

Ron Paul is no compassionate conservative when it comes to Myanmar

Sorry if this has already been posted.. I didn't see it though.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/05/paulhates...

Ron Paul is no compassionate conservative when it comes to Myanmar

Rep. Ron Paul of Texas is proud of what he sees as his truly conservative credentials. He's for smaller government, much smaller. He's for foreign trade but not foreign military involvement. He wants to spend that money wasted on empire-building right back here in these United States of America. He'd also get rid of the Education Department and the Federal Reserve.

Texas Rep. and Republican candidate for president Ron Paul was the only member of the House of Representatives to vote against offering condolences to the people of Burma Myanmar for their losses in the recent historic cyclone but he did not to congratulate the University of Kansas on a swell football season

His followers, who reverently call him Dr. Paul, like the way he would strictly adhere to the Constitution as he sees it and return more freedoms to the little guy in the face of big government.

Paul fans -- regularly called Paulites, Paultards or Paulunteers -- also see a gentle humility in the weathered but wise hands of the 72-year-old OB/GYN, who reputedly has delivered about 4,000 infants into life in this wondrous world.

But there seems to be another side to Paul. A mean, vicious, cruel and uncaring side. A side that sees millions of humans -- albeit Myanmarese who are not registered to vote in Texas -- afflicted with an historic cyclone, countless thousands of lives lost, devastation everywhere, and that could care less.

This week when a Congressional resolution came up for a vote merely offering "condolences and sympathy" to the people of Myanmar affected by the recent deadly cyclone, Ron Paul, the doting grandfather, the millionaire, was the only member of the entire House of Representatives to vote "No."

The Myanmar resolution, like all those goofy pieces of symbolic legislation, would...

... have done absolutely nothing for the stricken millions. Not even provided one paper towel. It's a cheap publicity trick that elected legislators waste countless hours on each session.

Such worthless resolutions don''t even get much publicity anymore. And, to put it in blunt political terms, exactly how strong is the Myanmarese vote around here anyway?

So Paul's symbolic stand against symbolic silliness looks good.

But then along come the sharp-eyed folks over at Radaronline.com, specifically Nick Curran, who finds out that Paul's stand against symbolic silliness when it comes to Asians whose huts and hovels were erased by cyclone, is not quite so principled and a whole lot more enthused about dumb statements of sentiment when the silliness is closer to home.

Come to find out that Paul has voted in favor of similar empty resolutions to congratulate the University of Kansas football team for a swell season and winning the 2008 FedEx Orange Bowl, to the Louisiana State football team for, golly, winning the 2007 Bowl Championship Series and to celebrate the New York Giants for their come-from-behind victory in Super Bowl XLII.

Seriously, what Texas congressman near Houston wouldn't want to get on the official Congressional record wishing all the best to every one of the good folks up in New York City?

Wait 'til the Houston Texans find out about that one. Or, worse for Paul, some Dallas fans.

-- Andrew Malcolm

Photo: Associated Press

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Links

to bills and current voting record of Ron Paul:
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/p000583/...

H Res 1181 was voted on 5/13/08, Vote #306

Dr. NO voted alone again...takes guts.

"Peer Pressure" is definately not in Ron Paul's vocabulary.

The law cannot make a wicked person virtuous…God’s grace alone can accomplish such a thing.
Ron Paul - The Revolution

Setting a good example is a far better way to spread ideals than through force of arms. Ron Paul

davidinliberty's picture

The sharp-eyed folks at Radaronline.com

That statement alone should tell you about the intellectual merits of this article.

Radaronline.com recently added Spencer Pratt as a columnist. Mr. Pratt is infamous for being the dimwitted, inconsequential, waste of space known as "Heidi's boyfriend" on MTV's The Hills.

One of Spencer's early columns on Radaronline was the intellectually stimulating piece: "When Is It The Right Time To Try Butt Sex?"

Yes, those are the sharp-eyed folks at Radaronline.com

-dave

"She's lower than the lowest whore outside the Holland Tunnel at 3am in fishnet stockings." - Michael Savage in reference to Dianne Sawyer

David Burns
Simi Valley, CA

Total crap.

The author of the article must be a complete chowderhead. It is so painfully obvious that he didn't even read the bill. What a moron.

h-daddy

i saw this this morning and

i was steaming. then i got to the comments and RPers had already taken care of sweet malcom. I am SO proud of all of the freedom fighters in our ranks and look forward to september.
~peace

~peace

The easy way out would have been easy.

Dr. Paul made a principled declaration instead of a costless pander.

As for the other meaningless votes, I would bet that Dr. Paul has an explaination or he will apologize the first chance he gets.

Probably the next time he is on Kavuto. Niel always likes to allow Paul to clarify. It looks like he is trying to trap Paul, but I think he genuinely thinks Paul is for real and allows him an opportunity to clarify the obviously unclear for the masses.

When the U.S. gives "aid"

When the U.S. gives "aid" there are always strings attached. Access to the political climate or media is usually the goal.

And often, the "aid" ends up in the "power pockets" of those societies, given those groups more leverage to pull off their aims and goals. In a lot of cases these groups are brutal and oppressive.

So, you see, we see it as an opportunity to "get a foot into their system". They see it as an opportunity to capture and/or hold onto power.

--just my opinion

Katrina/Rita

When we had OUR big disasters..(both the storms and the aftermath..ie. FEMA)...which nations offered to come to our aid? I met some German and Swiss citizens in Mobile, AL and Gulfport MS who flew over on their own dime to help out as they could....but no government aid from anywhere that I'm aware of...correct me if I'm wrong, please!
Why would we, why SHOULD we be the world's keepers? I agree with RP on his radio interview, that if there wasn't a federal income tax, Americans would be far better off financially, and because we are a generous people by nature, we would contribute to these disasters as INDIVIDUALS, not as a government.
BC
------------
Recently awakened, always vigilant.
If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention!

------------------
BC
Silence isn't always golden....sometimes it's yellow.

"The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." - Patrick Henry

Sorry, you are wrong

Actually a lot of governmental and non-governmental help was offered and given even by many poor countries
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_response_to_Hurri...
Though I cannot guarentee all this wikipedia-info is correct, I know that the
help offered by THW (a German agency for technical relief) bringing 15 high performance pumps was very helpful to drain New Orleans.
Somehow state organisations are helpful to fight state-made disasters

Dr. Paul cured my apathy

Ron Paul was right

I love it...

People always point out that Dr. Paul voted against this, or voted against that... but they don't ever ask why.

Maybe it's because he's the only one who actually READS the bills?

The rest just look at the title and the general intent and say, "Sounds ok to me."

Like the Patriot Act.

"Patriot is a good word. I'll vote yes."

Sickening.

It seems that people don't like being bothered

with those pesky things called "facts" either.

"First they ignore you. Then they ridicule you. Then they fight you. Then you win". --Mahatma Gandhi

"First they ignore you. Then they ridicule you. Then they fight you. Then you win". --Mahatma Gandhi

Which is more compassionate, freedom or slavery?

By any measure, Ron Paul is the most compassionate politician in the US.

How compassionate is it to engineer the plunder of the majority for the benefit of special interest as is the mode of operation for most politicians? How compassionate is for government to plunder you in order to be "charitable", especially when most of the money goes into the pockets of bureaucrats who administer these programs. How compassionate is it to debase money in a monetary system designed to benefit bankers and government?

I think what disasters happen around the world are the problem of those people around the world. There is nobody standing in your way of contributing to private charities who address these disasters.

Voting against a bill that interferes with a foreign government when that interference is outside the authority granted to the US government by the Constitution shows Dr. Paul's morality, as opposed to most of the thugs with whom he shares Congress, and the jerk who falsely accused him not being compassionate.

"Bend over and grab your ankles" should be etched in stone at the entrance to every government building and every government office.

davidinliberty's picture

The U.S. Government Should Not Aid Myanmar

The U.S. Government Should Not Aid Myanmar

Although any American is certainly welcome to contribute to the relief effort in Myanmar, no one should be forced to do so via his taxes or otherwise. It is a myth that there would not be sufficient aid to Myanmar without the government being involved in some way. Although I don't often agree with President Bush, he was certainly correct when he recently remarked that "the American people are generous people and they're a compassionate people." There is no doubt in my mind that Americans will give liberally to alleviate the suffering of the people of Myanmar. Many have done so already through donations to various relief agencies. But whether Americans give or don't give, it is still the case that it should be the decision of each individual American.

The case of Myanmar is a test of one's commitment to the freedom philosophy. A free society includes the freedom to be unconcerned, insensitive, or stingy. If the forced looting of the taxpayers for foreign-aid payments has always been wrong, then — cyclone or no cyclone — it is just as wrong now.

-dave

"She's lower than the lowest whore outside the Holland Tunnel at 3am in fishnet stockings." - Michael Savage in reference to Dianne Sawyer

David Burns
Simi Valley, CA

Interesting... you want to

Interesting... you want to know why he voted against the bill? Read it.

If you read it, the bill includes a condemnation of the Burmese government/regime. Of course they're bad, but Ron Paul doesn't believe in condemning and threatening countries... he's all about staying out of foreign problems remember? There's a difference between the legislation cited in the blog and this, because those other bills were concerning things that happened in America, where the Congress has jurisdiction. Congress has no jurisdiction over Burma. Paul likely sees it as an act of aggression/war to condemn and threaten in the legislation. Besides, why should you offer sympathy? The bill/condolences are not going to go to the people of Burma. It's going to be sent to the regime there. Why should we offer sympathy to them if they're inhumane to their own people? What's the likelihood that this message even gets heard by the people if they live under an authoritarian dictator/regime?

I don't think you understand how strict Ron Paul's interpretation of the Constitution is.... basically, if it's not listed in it/word for word, he doesn't think it should be done, not without amending the Constitution.... he makes all those votes for philosophical reasons, not because he's racist.

aVoiceof Reason needs a bump

so here it is. BUMP

allowing people to interpret the Constitution is what got is in this damn mess in the first place. Ron Paul shouldn't be his popular or needed. he should just be another politician. instead he's one of only a handful that's actually doing the job correctly.

keep American money in America!!!

No matter who you vote for, the government always gets in - Bill Hicks

True that!

True that!

Myanmar

If folk kept their own cash then I'm sure most would donate some to good causes. (Such as in the international pop/rock charity concerts/Tutsami, etc). As has been pointed out already, even so, little gets through and is wasted. Ultimately it has to be a free choice to donate earned cash to charity. Ron Paul is blameless and right.

'I always think of all you canvassors and precinct leaders and delegates at the front line and caucuses.
Good luck out there &Thank you. You're a gift.

'I always thank of all you canvassors and precinct leaders and delegates who were at the front line and caucuses.
Good luck out there &Thank you. You're a gift.

the world is full of suffering

are Americans supposed to work till they drop dead to send their money all over the place?

how about people do as i do and help their damn self?

No matter who you vote for, the government always gets in - Bill Hicks

HRES 1181 IH

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;

Whereas more than 30 disaster assessment teams from 18 different Nations and the United Nations have been denied permission to enter Burma by the junta;

Whereas the United States, through its Government, the Burma-American community, and its people as a whole, has already extended significant support to the people of Burma during this difficult time, including a $250,000 emergency contribution authorized by the United States Embassy in Burma to be released immediately, and $3,000,000 in additional aid relief announced on May 6, 2008, by the White House; and

Whereas a United States Agency for International Development disaster response team is positioned in neighboring Thailand: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the House of Representatives--

(1) extends its condolences and sympathy to the people of Burma for the grave loss of life and vast destruction caused by Cyclone Nargis;

(2) vows its full support of and solidarity with the people of Burma;

(3) calls on Americans to provide immediate emergency assistance to cyclone victims in Burma through humanitarian agencies;

(4) expresses confidence that the people of Burma will succeed in overcoming the hardships incurred because of this tragedy;

(5) calls for the Burmese military junta to consider the well-being of its people and accept broad international assistance; and

(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.

The law cannot make a wicked person virtuous…God’s grace alone can accomplish such a thing.
Ron Paul - The Revolution

Setting a good example is a far better way to spread ideals than through force of arms. Ron Paul

Good Boy Ron

The bill, with it's crafty words near the bottom, calls for direct intervention. How could you vote yes for such a thing. I'm glad Ron Paul wasn't as foolish as most Americans on crap like this.

"We're so sorry for your problems. Back off Myamar Government or we'll force democracy down your throat next! The poor people suffering. How dare you step in the path of the worlds Kingdom!"

Such mixed garble as that. Summed up of course.

Don't think I'm being cruel. I have a nice little envelope with money being saved to help the people over there. My whole family is pitching in. It's just not our governments job to issue threats and condolences in the same breath; bastards.

Condolences is one thing...

why put all this rhetoric slamming the Burmese government/military regime? Sounds too familiar...Iraq, Iran, Korea, Vietnam...

And what right does the United States have to demand anything of a soveriegn nation? (item #6)

And it asks that $3,000,000 be given...perhaps Dr. Paul knows it won't go where it should. Especialy if the "military regime" is so corrupt and hostile to the USA. I believe a "duh" needs to be said.

I do not believe for one minute that Ron Paul is the cruel monster the above, very out-of-context, article proposes.

The law cannot make a wicked person virtuous…God’s grace alone can accomplish such a thing.
Ron Paul - The Revolution

Setting a good example is a far better way to spread ideals than through force of arms. Ron Paul

Rhetoric like this causes BLOWBACK!

Thanks for posting the text of the bill, Joe. Maybe now people will read it and realize the implications of chastising other nations. BLOWBACK!

Waa-a-a-ah! Cry me a river,

Waa-a-a-ah! Cry me a river, Marxist.

This is why bedwetting liberals are no more our friends than scheming neo-con fascisti.

SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States

SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States

Read the damned bill

And you will see why Dr. Paul voted no for it.

The bill offered the deepest sympathies (meaningless) and condolences for the loss and destruction...but...

it also contained a sharp condemnation of the Mynamar government and the military. This is cleverly hidden in the bill, but not to our good doctor.

Ask any of the 434 congressmen who voted for this bill if THEY READ THE BILL. I can be certain that Dr. Paul read it, for he reads every piece of legislation that comes to his desk. The rest of them just call their party chairman and ask how he/she should vote.

Kudos to Dr. Paul for standing behind your beliefs that the government in Myanmar is none of our business.

Comparing this bill to ones congratulating the Giants on winning the Super Bowl is quite irresponsible and dishonest...but i'm sure the writer of this article didn't read the bill either.

Playing devil's advocate...

I completely agree with the 'NO' vote on Myanmar. But why is it irresponsible to compare it to the football vote?

What should be our response to that?

--------
We don't know how to mind our own business
'Cause the whole worlds got to be just like us
Now we are fighting a war over there
No matter who's the winner
We can't pay the cost
-Steppenwolf 1969

'Cause there's a monster on the loose

Because...

Voting on patting a football team on the back is absolutely meaningless...you could certainly argue that it was a waste of time and money to write the bill and vote on it...but to vote yes or no, you're still just talking, and that is an amoral decision.

To vote on the Myanmar bill, Dr. Paul would have been criticizing a foreign government for how they conduct their business. It may seem meaningless and harmless, but it will breed resentment with the Myanmar government and could have some bad consequences.

They are compaing meddling in the foreign affairs of another country to congratulating the Giants on a good season...to compare two bills like that is irresponsible.

The only way they are related is that they are both a monumental and public waste of our money. By the time a vote is called, the time has been wasted and the vote would be meaningless in the case of the football team, so the vote didn't matter.

the football vote....

is not meddling in other countries government's affairs.

Latinos for Ron Paul

Rand Paul 2016 for Peace

Agree.

Are they not wasting taxpayers by voting yes on a football team congratulation bill?
If they voted no, that would stop the bill dead in its tracks and save money (albeit a potentially very small amount) compared to if it was allowed to continue on.

Thanks for the clear answer

I just think this issue is silly. The bill is just a phony portrayal of sympathy.

first of all

i do not believe aid ever arrives to the people who need it, oh a few boxes for photo ops maybe or if its hepped up gmo food perhaps.what has happened to all the aid generated for the tsunami victims or our own katrina victims,,,the money and supplies just seems to vanish and never is accounted for. besides if we dont start taking care of our own country, we wont be any use to anybody.Dr. Pauls understanding of world events far exceeds mine and so i will defer to his advice on this subject.

Well, we were warned

that they were going to get mean and nasty to Dr. Paul. I agree with Dr. Paul
they are wasting time that they could be getting the hell out of Iraq. Where the hell were they when Katrina hit and are still suffering. Peace

Prepare & Share the Message of Freedom through Positive-Peaceful-Activism.