Death Penalty.Paul V. Romney

You hear the words flip flop all the time.Always associated with Romney.
Well the mighty Paul has changed his views as well.
On the issue most CONSERVATIVES LIKE and WANT.
The death penalty.
Romney has always supported it.
Paul did now doesn't. ( for you keeping score that's a flip flop )

Romney GOVERNED that way.
Paul of course only has words.
But words count so ...
PAUL..http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Ron_Paul_Crime.htm

Opposes death penalty at state and federal level

Paul opposes the death penalty and would vote against it in “any legislative body he was a member of,” according to campaign spokesman Jesse Benton. In 2005, Paul praised the late Pope John Paul II for being an “eloquent and consistent advocate for an ethic of life, exemplified by his struggles against abortion, war, euthanasia and the death penalty.”

Q: Is the death penalty is carried out justly?

A: Over the years, I’ve held pretty rigid all my beliefs, but I’ve changed my opinion about the death penalty. For federal purposes, I no longer believe in the death penalty. I believe it has been issued unjustly. If you’re rich, you get away with it; if you’re poor & you’re from the inner city, you’re more likely to be prosecuted & convicted. Today, with DNA evidence, there have been too many mistakes. So I am now opposed to the federal death penalty.
Source: Pew Forum on Religion and Politics 2008 Jan 1, 2008

Now for Romney..
Reform sentencing process; appeal too-lenient sentences

Romney and Healey pledged to enact strong sentencing guidelines, especially for sex crimes, and vowed to level the playing field for prosecutors by giving them the right to appeal lenient sentences imposed on criminals.

Supports death penalty in heinous murders

Romney pushes for a death penalty law for murderers convicted of heinous first-degree homicides. “The ultimate penalty should be available in Massachusetts for criminals who commit the most egregious murders,” Romney said.

Favored mandatory sentencing and three strikes

Supported death penalty
Wanted to abolish parole, limit probation, and end furloughs and release programs for violent or repeat offenders
Favored mandatory sentencing and three strikes and you’re out
Supported restrictions on plea bargaining
His crime prevention efforts also focused on instilling family values.
Source: Boston Globe review of 1994 canpaign issues Mar 21, 2002


Now IF you were a card carrying conservative Republican...without knowing who worshiped who..which guy seems more in tune with the Republicans ?

No wonder they focus on MORMONS..because they cant compete with Romney on the issues.

 

So Ron Paul isn't an idiot? That was the point of this thread?

 

Being a Charter Member of the Republican National Committee, I actually DO have card, and I fully support Paul on this issue.

 

When did this "BIG FEDERAL MANDATES" become the norm with the GOP, is the OP trying to slight RP on this?

I can't wait for the TSA to set up check points looking for stupid people, wow would they be busy. Keep those private prisons stocked up full with patrons. Holy crap. =\

 

So..
Paul is wrong on the death penalty.
Paul is wrong on our national defense.

and Paul wont answer why sanctuary cities are Constitutional and why enforcing any law is what any elected official is sworn to up hold.
Those laws are not limited to drug enforcement and illegal tuition favors.
Paul is not a conservative..a charge leveled at Romney.

and Mr.Card carrying Republican how you can support someone so out of mainstream Republican ideals ?
As a Republican township delegate myself I saw Paul was destroyed in my area over his weak defense position.
DESTROYED.. Vets from as far back as Korea wouldn't or couldn't support Paul.
Obama would do the same to him.

 

So...
what are you talking about, you made a few statements followed them up with your opinion and that makes it right?

As far as him being "so out of mainstream Republican ideals" exactly and why I support him, the main stream Republican have aligned themselves with Trotskyists who make no bones about their Nation Building ideals through permanent wars, and revolution.

I am a conservative, and Ron Paul represents a conservative base, it's you that are out of step with what the masses want, you are just in line with the vocal few. You are a victim of the Hegelian dialectic, the problem was created so they could sell you the solution, and you just can seem to get enough of it. Stop being the victim.

I still find it hilarious that your ilk can call occupying other countries "National Defense" that's just defies all reason, but at least you're ilk is consistent on that paradox.

Just tell me this, which part exactly of the constitution do you have a problem with?

 

The part that Paul chooses to ignore..
To protect and defend against all enemies.. foreign and domestic..
( just fooling around ) that isn't in that old constitution.

Oh NO... that is If he gets elected.. he will ignore drug laws..the death penalty...defense pacts with friends ...immigration laws..

The man is not a genius..he is a old populist with the ant establishment fools..all 8 % of them.. The masses ?

Wrong on all the issues that A president can lead with right now.
Maybe he can get a teaching job at Columbia after this loss.

 

Better hope he gets elected, Obama is a huge failure but the only way he will win again is if the GOP does the same thing they did in 08 and that's play a stupid game of politics.

It will just be more of the same otherwise. I've already got my ticket out of this place, I'm done with the lower 48. After the dollar defaults when the GOP does what it always does and that play stupid, the USA will go down in the history books as just another democracy failure.

 

He's right on both.

Lamestream republicans have no ideals, they're just Democrats suffering from male menopause.

Vets are whiny socialists who just can't get enough handouts.

 

Enemies like the government. Enemies like you, comrade.

 

Oh BillyBoy, when will you learn that non-interventionism is not the same as isolationism?

Protecting our country does not involve the mindless invasion of other countries based on the mere idea that they MIGHT at some point in time attain a weapon that they wouldn't even have the capabilities to deploy.

Your feeble attempts to paint Ron Paul in this negative light as you keep trying to do are so far past pathetic that there isn't likely any accurate adjective to describe them any more. Anyone that thinks there might be, please do share.

 

It is defense spending that is endangering our long term security.

Who are these enemies and how does this justify in excess of 1 Trillion a year all tolled ?

Were we not able to defend ourselves in 2000 when speanding was 300 Billion ?

Who are these enemies that we are so afraid of that we are willing to bankrupt our, and our childrens future over.

Ron Paul gets it .. Most Conservatives dont unfortunately.

I even think Bush and his crew understood this but since the Rapture is coming soon who cares about the furture.

This is the only explanation I can think of for the reckless spending policies of the last decade.

I do not think hard drugs should be legalized but Pot ?? If you look at how much money we spend chasing, prosecuting, and jailing pot smokers it would shock you.

Pot is no worse than Alcohol and keeping it illegal (prohibition) creates crime and lines the pockets of criminals.

Last .. we lose all that revenue. I do not smoke the stuff myself but did in my youth and it is the equivalent of taking an asprine.

The Pot war is an insane waste of money and so clearly against the constitution it hurts.

Death Penalty - Quit putting so many innocent people to death and then talk to me. As far as Im concerned the death penalty should only be for serial killers types (the most heinous) where there is irrefutable evidence.

Perhaps no genius but most of the others are either mentaly incompetent or just saying what they think the raging masses will believe or want to hear.

To me it does not seem that you have a good grasp on what the right side of the issues are which makes you on the wrong side and Paul on the right side.

 

I am so sorry for you guys.

You cannot debate my original thought.
Paul flipped and flopped on the death Penalty.
IN IS OWN WORDS,and I'll go farther and paint him that say anything to stay in the mainstream movement of ANTI- ESTABLISHMENT.

Like how could he anti if he believed in the death penalty like most Democrats...and most Republicans ?
Gee..If only I could hit you on the head with that anti plank a little harder.

Same with national defense..
He chooses to be opposite of Republicans and most past democrats
WHY ?
Not because it worked or didn't work..but because it was Anti.
Anti-establishment.
And he could always say what the money that could be saved would replace taxation..GEE ..what if a weak defense and weak spending on defense failed..??
There is probably a reason both partys favor a strong national defense.
The people support and demand it.

The oath he would swear to is the same one that our elected officials violate every day.Letting OWS protest for months without a permit.Letting illegals get any Social benefits without cost or penalty.Passing a health Care bill using trickery and back door tactics.Picking winners and losers using taxpayer dollars.Not enforcing our drug laws to the fullest extend..ending the BS sanctuary cities.

Paul is a Fraud and notice how last night in the debate he artfully dodged the Texas corruption and crony politics that all TEXAS politicians use.
He wanted nothing to do with answering that question..
If Paul would somehow mystically be #1 he would be so grilled on that and you would be just as disgusted as you are with Perry.
What happens in Texas should stay in Texas.

The home field advantage both have would dissolve in a second in a general election.

 

The Death Penalty is a Morally conflicted issue over the course of Human History and it is a Flip Flop in his terms on the FEDERAL LEVEL not the STATE LEVEL. You've declared your War against Ron Paul and struggle to gain any ground that doesn't revolve around stretching the truth or debasing an arguments. Would you like to go into Romney's stances? How about what he believes in the 2nd Amendment back in 1994 when he outright said that he is for strong Gun Control Laws. Now this gets even better! How about when in 2006 he suddenly changes his stance then runs for the Republican Nomination! Wow... Could you imagine that... Changing his position a year before the Debates were about to happen and simply due to the fact that he is running for the Republican Nomination. That screams scumbag.

Now onto National Defense which you seem to get that and Militarism/Imperialism mixed into each other.

"The belief or desire of a government or people that a country should maintain a strong military capability and be prepared to use it aggressively to defend or promote national interests."

Militarism is what you're advocating and stretching the definition to coincide with National Defense is clearly a large stretch. Either we're a Imperialist Country or we're a Constitutional Republic... and onto that point you seem to believe that since an overwhelming majority of Politicians who constantly receive lobbying money as well as vote in Unconstitutional Laws that their opinion is even a good one to take in? I guess since an overwhelming majority voted in Obamacare it should be fine and dandy to you right? Sorry following the herd of lemmings off of the cliff doesn't make you right it makes you an idiot.

Your rant on your next part is incoherent and not even true concerning Ron Paul that I have to outright call you an idiot again.

Texas Cronyism... I guess it's easy to scream "You Crony Capitalist!" in Perry's face without preparation of actual facts to prove his case. I guess it is if you like making yourself appear the fool while you try to scramble to prove your case. You don't make a move onto someone and call them a murderer if you have no proof that sticks to make your accusations true.

Also you've yet to reply to the other thread concerning all of the other points I made and you've yet to specify the specifics how Romney plans to deregulate. Is that more bull(*)(*)(*)(*) you're trying to toss in to prove Romney is better without anything to back it up?

 

Paul flipped on the death penalty for a reason.to keep his anti establishment people Happy.END OF STORY.
No argument about being un constitutional.
States right ? BS ..He said it should be ENDED EVERYWHERE .
Paul guy is so soft on crime it hurts to read about him and his idiotic positions.
Romney is the opposite and Governed that way.
Now about your stupid Gun rights debate..I have already destroyed any and all arguments .but just for you I present exhibit A.
What the Gun lobby says about MITT in MASS.
http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Mitt_Romney_Gun_Control.htm

Compromise MA gun bills were not gain for gun owner

During Romney’s term he signed several pieces of firearms regulation. A look at that regulation does not reveal an anti-gun Romney. Those bills are characterized as “net gains” for gun owners in a state where opinioned is weighed against them.
During his tenure, Gov. Romney was credited with several improvements to state laws, including protections for shooting clubs, restoration of the Inland Fish and Game Fund, and requirements that all new hunters pass a hunter safety course. He is also credited with relaxing manufacturing testing for some models of pistols.
In 2004, Gov. Romney signed a firearms reform bill that made permanent the ban on assault weapons as well as clarified and insured other rights and responsibilities for gun owners. It was a hard-fought compromise between interest groups on both sides of the issue. The NRA Gun Owners’ Action League, law enforcement, and Massachusetts gun owners endorsed the bill.
Source: The Man, His Values, & His Vision, p. 72-73 Aug 31, 2007
END.

Again I must point out ...Paul has never led anywhere.
Romney led on a AWAY GAME FIELD where 80 % of the legislature and the MAJORITY of its citizens are DEMOCRAT.

He NEVER Made ANY EXECUTIVE MANDATE BANNING ANYTHING..every bill was passed with complete debate and SUPPORT.
http://www.aboutmittromney.com/gun_myths.htm

http://www.goal.org/newspages/romney.html

“Despite the efforts of some (including The Boston Globe) to spin this bill as an extension of or creation of a new "Assault Weapons" ban, the bill makes no net changes to the Commonwealth`s laws regarding those types of firearms...
“Here are just some of the points that the media (including The Boston Globe) got wrong.
“Myth: Some headlines claimed that the legislature voted to expand the ban on the sale of the same 19 guns that the federal government has banned.
“Fact: The guns are already banned in Massachusetts. The legislature only voted to clarify the definition of so-called "assault weapons," but made no changes to the number of guns included.
“Myth: The gun ban was extended.
“Fact: Our state`s gun ban was not due to disappear, nor will it become invalid if the federal ban sunsets in September.
“Myth: The legislature somehow "won over" gun-rights supporters by including reforms.
“Fact: NRA and Gun owners` Action League (GOAL) had made it very clear to the legislature that we would not give up any ground. NRA and GOAL supported this bill because it did not ban any guns, and because it made much-needed reforms.
“Myth: Those legislators that wanted to expand the semi-auto gun ban claimed that they "spearheaded" S.2367.
“...
“NRA members should be very pleased in knowing that their efforts to educate and work with their local representatives and senators resulted in a successful reform action.
“Thanks to you and the Gun Owners` Action League, lawful gun owners can now take advantage of this first set of real reforms in over five years.”
NRA-ILA :: Massachusetts - Firearms Reform Bill Sent to the Governor`s Desk - Jun 29, 2004


Now want to debate the truth ?
Any person can misspeak or make BRAIN FARTS from time to time..here is a RECORD of the MAN as he led.

 

There's a difference between changing your opinion and flip-flopping. Flip-flopping involves dishonesty, pretending like you have maintained consistency in your stance for political gain. Paul hasn't done this, he has openly and honestly admitted that he changed his opinion. But it doens't surprise me that the OP doesn't have the basic edcuation required to be able to figure this out on his own.

 

I wish more people would admit they are wrong on things and change their stance. I am proud of Ron Paul for being brave enouph to do it as a politicion. Wether you agree with his stance or not you should respect that he was willing to do it publicly. Thank you for bringing it to our attention it just shows us why we should vote for the man.

 

Good deal..
Then you'll give Romney a PASS when he said he was wrong on abortion and switched to the right side ?

Romney is right on Abortion.
Crime.
Death penalty.
Border fence and immigration.
In state tuition for illegals.
Job creation.
Taxes..
Gun control.
National defense.

and he can beat Obama next year.

 

Supporting the Assault Weapons Ban in both Federal/State Level is still infringement on the 2nd Amendment rights of the People but, then as soon as the 08 Elections start coming up he changes his positions on being Anti-Gun to Gun Friendly. He is a classic case of flip flopping double-talking Politician that is willing to ride the waves of his Elected positions and do what the majority tell him to do (Or his Corporate Buddies).

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsCmiFcRyIc"]Romney: Same Candidate, Different Positions - YouTube[/ame]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=Kk1bJOpYUqE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=F9Ygw9CQ9po

Obama Won... Status Quo with Obama's views and as soon as Republicans buckle against it or the Election is coming *Presto* change of positions. Sorry for having to dig through 3-4 seconds of information to clearly see he doesn't care for the Constitution and constantly flip flops to prepare for his "next" Political Office.

Edit: Which stance on Abortion? [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFMdK0TWtks"]Mitt Romney Flip-Flop on Abortion - YouTube[/ame]

1994-2002 he wants to remain as Governor as soon as 2008 starts to roll up his stances change... FUNNY!

 

I respect anyone that can admit when they are wrong. Now the test is are they voting to support that stance. Has Romny done that since he admitted he was wrong?

 

http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Mitt_Romney_Abortion.htm

I took action as governor to preserve the sanctity of life

Q: Do you believe life begins at conception?

A: I do. I believe from a political perspective that life begins at conception. I don’t pretend to know, if you will, from a theological standpoint when life begins. I’d committed to the people of Massachusetts that I would not change the laws one way or the other, and I honored that commitment. But each law that was brought to my desk attempted to expand abortion rights and, in each case, I vetoed that effort. I also promoted abstinence education in our schools. I vetoed an effort, for instance, to give young women a morning after pill who did not have prescriptions. So I took action to preserve the sanctity of life. But I did not violate my word, of course.
Source: Meet the Press: 2007 “Meet the Candidates” series Dec 16, 2007

End.

In No Way did he promote abortion or advocate changing the law TO THAT THINKING.

All politicians say things to get elected..EVEN PAUL.
What matters is how they actually led after being elected.
Obama promised sunshine and lollypops..peace and flowers and lots of goodies if elected.
Talk about Holy Flip flop AFTER being elected.
You guys are attacking the wrong person...but since you cant compete on deeds and accomplishments you must go after sound bites.

 

I'd like to point out that it costs more in taxpayer dollars to execute someone that it does to keep them in prison for life.

 

I personally support the death penalty, but Paul's opposition to it is consistent with his Libertarian philosophy, and it's also consistent with his abortion stance.

 

His position is simply its not the Federal Govt. job to decide the death penalty on residents of individual states. Let the states decide.

WOW, we are so screwed. People are really stupid...lol

 

Hahaha, nice.