Ron Paul will vote FOR House resolution condemning attack in Arizona

I would've voted against it. There is no authority in the Constitution. Weren't they going to cite the authority from the Constitution for anything they pass? What are they going to use to justify this?

I think in this one instance, it might be wise for Ron to vote for the resolution. Its a political grenade that can be lobbed at him (and us) if he doesn't. There is also the fact that this doesn't allocate money or promote government waste, at least on the surface.
 
Someone posted here once something like 'At this point, Ron could vote for every meaningless non-binding resolution from here until dollar failure and it wouldn't impact my opinion of him.....'

I'm pretty much there. Still, I DO like that he is consistent even in the little things.
 
That argument is flawed. The same could be said about Ron Paul having voted no on some resolutions that basically say: 'hey, we feel bad for you' for severe weather victims.

I've never seen any resolution that Ron voted against that either didn't either cost money or wasn't some undercover foreign policy slap at some other country. Please cite what you are talking about.
 
Maybe we could trick them into passing a bill saying the initiation of force is never acceptable either toward or against the government and its agents?

Brilliant. Then after they pass it, the cry will come out against what they have indirectly implied; that initiation of force against civilians is OK. And then they will realize that they have shot themselves in the foot. The question then is: Will they be stupid enough to comply with the outcry and pass a resolution that the initiation of force against the people is never acceptable – thereby nullifying their own existence?
 
((Edit: Sorry if my posts for the past few days have contained a number of explecitives, I've just been getting more angry than usual over news stories. I think I caught what AF has got :P))

No problem. I think I've recently picked up a case of that as well.
 
If RP were to vote against it then wave goodbye to any chance of getting the nomination. The inter-web tore him to pieces because he voted against the chinese guy.
 
Text of H. Res. 32:

H. Res. 32

In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

January 12, 2011.

Whereas on January 8, 2011, an armed gunman opened fire at a `Congress on your Corner' event hosted by Representative Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson, Arizona, killing 6 and wounding at least 14 others;

Whereas Christina Taylor Green, Dorothy Morris, John Roll, Phyllis Schneck, Dorwan Stoddard, and Gabriel Zimmerman lost their lives in this attack;

Whereas Christina Taylor Green, the 9-year-old daughter of John and Roxanna Green, was born on September 11, 2001, and was a third grader with an avid interest in government who was recently elected to the student council at Mesa Verde Elementary School;

Whereas Dorothy Morris, who was 76 years old, attended the January 8 event with George, her husband of over 50 years with whom she had 2 daughters, and who was also critically injured as he tried to shield her from the shooting;

Whereas John Roll, a Pennsylvania native who was 63 years old, began his professional career as a bailiff in 1972, was appointed to the Federal bench in 1991, and became chief judge for the District of Arizona in 2006, and was a devoted husband to his wife Maureen, father to his 3 sons, and grandfather to his 5 grandchildren;

Whereas Phyllis Schneck, a proud mother of 3, grandmother of 7, and great-grandmother from New Jersey, was spending the winter in Arizona, and was a 79-year-old church volunteer and New York Giants fan;

Whereas Dorwan Stoddard, a 76-year-old retired construction worker and volunteer at the Mountain Avenue Church of Christ, is credited with shielding his wife Mavy, a longtime friend whom he married while they were in their 60s, who was also injured in the shooting;

Whereas Gabriel Matthew Zimmerman, who was 30 years old and engaged to be married, served as Director of Community Outreach to Representative Gabrielle Giffords, and was a social worker before serving with Representative Giffords;

Whereas Representative Gabrielle Giffords was a target of this attack, and remains in critical condition at an Arizona hospital;

Whereas 13 others were also wounded in the shooting, including Ron Barber and Pamela Simon, both staffers to Representative Giffords; and

Whereas several individuals, including Patricia Maisch, Army Col. Bill Badger (Retired), who was also wounded in the shooting, Roger Sulzgeber, Joseph Zimudio, and Daniel Hernandez, Jr., helped apprehend the gunman and assist the injured, thereby risking their lives for the safety of others, and should be commended for their bravery: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the House of Representatives--

(1) condemns in the strongest possible terms the horrific attack which occurred at the `Congress on your Corner' event hosted by Representative Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson, Arizona, on January 8, 2011;

(2) offers its heartfelt condolences to the families, friends, and loved ones of those who were killed in that attack;

(3) expresses its hope for the rapid and complete recovery of those wounded in the shooting;

(4) honors the memory of Christina Taylor Green, Dorothy Morris, John Roll, Phyllis Schneck, Dorwan Stoddard, and Gabriel Zimmerman;

(5) applauds the bravery and quick thinking exhibited by those individuals who prevented the gunman from potentially taking more lives and helped to save those who had been wounded;

(6) recognizes the service of the first responders who raced to the scene and the health care professionals who tended to the victims once they reached the hospital, whose service and skill saved lives;

(7) reaffirms the bedrock principle of American democracy and representative government, which is memorialized in the First Amendment of the Constitution and which Representative Gabrielle Giffords herself read in the Hall of the House of Representatives on January 6, 2011, of `the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances';

(8) stands firm in its belief in a democracy in which all can participate and in which intimidation and threats of violence cannot silence the voices of any American;

(9) honors the service and leadership of Representative Gabrielle Giffords, a distinguished member of this House, as she courageously fights to recover; and

(10) when adjourning today, shall do so out of respect to the victims of this attack.

Attest:

Clerk.
 
Um why is Ron Paul voting for this? If he does not does he automatically condone violence? I really do not get it, it's a stupid political stunt and not a Constitutionally mandated area...it's a waste of time and does nothing at all.

RP sort of dissapoints me by engaging in pointless politicking. He is one who I would have thought would have been the first to sidestep such foolishness.

Again...so if you do not engage is this sad political stunt it means you condone violence?

.......In other news rapists are bad lets vote on that too
 
Text of H. Res. 32:

H. Res. 32

In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

January 12, 2011.

Whereas on January 8, 2011, an armed gunman opened fire at a `Congress on your Corner' event hosted by Representative Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson, Arizona, killing 6 and wounding at least 14 others;

Whereas Christina Taylor Green, Dorothy Morris, John Roll, Phyllis Schneck, Dorwan Stoddard, and Gabriel Zimmerman lost their lives in this attack;

Whereas Christina Taylor Green, the 9-year-old daughter of John and Roxanna Green, was born on September 11, 2001, and was a third grader with an avid interest in government who was recently elected to the student council at Mesa Verde Elementary School;

Whereas Dorothy Morris, who was 76 years old, attended the January 8 event with George, her husband of over 50 years with whom she had 2 daughters, and who was also critically injured as he tried to shield her from the shooting;

Whereas John Roll, a Pennsylvania native who was 63 years old, began his professional career as a bailiff in 1972, was appointed to the Federal bench in 1991, and became chief judge for the District of Arizona in 2006, and was a devoted husband to his wife Maureen, father to his 3 sons, and grandfather to his 5 grandchildren;

Whereas Phyllis Schneck, a proud mother of 3, grandmother of 7, and great-grandmother from New Jersey, was spending the winter in Arizona, and was a 79-year-old church volunteer and New York Giants fan;

Whereas Dorwan Stoddard, a 76-year-old retired construction worker and volunteer at the Mountain Avenue Church of Christ, is credited with shielding his wife Mavy, a longtime friend whom he married while they were in their 60s, who was also injured in the shooting;

Whereas Gabriel Matthew Zimmerman, who was 30 years old and engaged to be married, served as Director of Community Outreach to Representative Gabrielle Giffords, and was a social worker before serving with Representative Giffords;

Whereas Representative Gabrielle Giffords was a target of this attack, and remains in critical condition at an Arizona hospital;

Whereas 13 others were also wounded in the shooting, including Ron Barber and Pamela Simon, both staffers to Representative Giffords; and

Whereas several individuals, including Patricia Maisch, Army Col. Bill Badger (Retired), who was also wounded in the shooting, Roger Sulzgeber, Joseph Zimudio, and Daniel Hernandez, Jr., helped apprehend the gunman and assist the injured, thereby risking their lives for the safety of others, and should be commended for their bravery: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the House of Representatives--

(1) condemns in the strongest possible terms the horrific attack which occurred at the `Congress on your Corner' event hosted by Representative Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson, Arizona, on January 8, 2011;

(2) offers its heartfelt condolences to the families, friends, and loved ones of those who were killed in that attack;

(3) expresses its hope for the rapid and complete recovery of those wounded in the shooting;

(4) honors the memory of Christina Taylor Green, Dorothy Morris, John Roll, Phyllis Schneck, Dorwan Stoddard, and Gabriel Zimmerman;

(5) applauds the bravery and quick thinking exhibited by those individuals who prevented the gunman from potentially taking more lives and helped to save those who had been wounded;

(6) recognizes the service of the first responders who raced to the scene and the health care professionals who tended to the victims once they reached the hospital, whose service and skill saved lives;

(7) reaffirms the bedrock principle of American democracy and representative government, which is memorialized in the First Amendment of the Constitution and which Representative Gabrielle Giffords herself read in the Hall of the House of Representatives on January 6, 2011, of `the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances';

(8) stands firm in its belief in a democracy in which all can participate and in which intimidation and threats of violence cannot silence the voices of any American;

(9) honors the service and leadership of Representative Gabrielle Giffords, a distinguished member of this House, as she courageously fights to recover; and

(10) when adjourning today, shall do so out of respect to the victims of this attack.

Attest:

Clerk.

I have no problem with that resolution. No tax payers money is being spent and no intervention in foreign affairs.
 
Um why is Ron Paul voting for this? If he does not does he automatically condone violence? I really do not get it, it's a stupid political stunt and not a Constitutionally mandated area...it's a waste of time and does nothing at all.

RP sort of dissapoints me by engaging in pointless politicking. He is one who I would have thought would have been the first to sidestep such foolishness.

Again...so if you do not engage is this sad political stunt it means you condone violence?

.......In other news rapists are bad lets vote on that too

The constitution doesn't prohibit it either. This isn't a case of spending other people's money or getting involved in someone else's politics. In short none of the reasons Dr. Paul has given in the past for voting "no" on certain items applies here. Ron Paul doesn't vote no just to vote note. He always has, and gives, a specific reason.
 
The constitution doesn't prohibit it either. This isn't a case of spending other people's money or getting involved in someone else's politics. In short none of the reasons Dr. Paul has given in the past for voting "no" on certain items applies here. Ron Paul doesn't vote no just to vote note. He always has, and gives, a specific reason.

Ok man well you have taken a position that is the direct OPPOSITE of what the Constitution is all about. The tenth amendment pretty much annihilates your whole argument. If it is not specifically enumerated as a power it CANNOT be done. But by all means lets start getting stuff all backwards and say if the Constituion does say that the government can't do it then its ok...of course we have to ignore the tenth amendment and the whole idea of limited government...but who gives a krap right?

It's not like this is some dastardly attack on our freedoms...I am not going to lose sleep over it...but Ron Paul always votes according to the Constitution...in this case he is fudging it...and for what gain? So I guess Ron Paul votes according to the Constitution most of the time...almost always....thats not nearly as good as saying he always does.

And for what some political stunt?
 
Ok man well you have taken a position that is the direct OPPOSITE of what the Constitution is all about. The tenth amendment pretty much annihilates your whole argument. If it is not specifically enumerated as a power it CANNOT be done. But by all means lets start getting stuff all backwards and say if the Constituion does say that the government can't do it then its ok...of course we have to ignore the tenth amendment and the whole idea of limited government...but who gives a krap right?

Wrong. You've just proven that you don't understand the 10th amendment in particular and the legislature in general. A non binding resolution doesn't DO anything. All that's happened is that a bunch of congressmen have voted to say "Yeah, I agree with this". And? So? Really, go to law school and audit a class on the constitution. Or attend Michael Badnarik's class on the constitution. Or read some good books. Non binding resolutions don't in general mean jack. Sometimes they should be voted against because there is some real effect (like condemning some other country when that is none of our business). In this case it means nothing.
 
Back
Top