But, his postion on the rights of women, minorities, and gays leaves a lot to be desired.
?
He voted to ban gay adoption in DC.
No, he did not. This is an absurd lie.
Congressman Paul's position on gay marriage is that defining and recognizing marriages is not a Federal or constitutional matter, but should be left as the States' right.[30] In 1999 he voted for H.R. 2587 which contained an amendment that sought to prevent the use of Federal funding for the promotion of adoptions of foster children being used to promote joint adoptions by unrelated, unmarried people.
There was no mention of gay adoptions in the bill, but the amendment could have been construed to act negatively upon gay couples adopting children in the District of Columbia, and in any event was not present in the final bill.[31]
He voted against the Federal Marriage Amendment in 2004.
He's opposes a woman's right to choose.
Believes it is a state matter.
He opposes affirmative action.
Yeah? Clearly a position of one who supports civil rights.
He doesn't support gays being able to openly serve in the military, etc.
Yeah he does. Here is what he said at his Google interview.
"Don't ask, don't tell doesn't sound all that bad to me because as an employer, I've never asked them [employees] anything and I don't want them to tell me anything."
"So I would say that everyone should be treated equally, and they [gays] shouldn't be discrimated against because of that alone. Which means that even though those words aren't offensive to me, that 'Don't ask, don't tell' don't sound so bad to me,
I think the way it's enforced is bad. Because, literally, if somebody is a very, very good individual working for our military--and I met one just the other day in my office, who was a translator--and he was kicked out for really no good reason at all. I would want to change that, I don't support that interpretation."
So, it shouldn't be rocket science to figure out why liberals don't kneel at the feet of the great Ron Paul, to declare him the greatest civil liberties advocate since martin luther king..
I implied it is odd that you spend your time hurling vicious insults at him and, as you do here, lying about him. I did not say you needed to praise him.
Edit: oh, and he is supportive of the death penalty, at the State level.
He is not. Is it a states rights issue? Yes, of course, there is no doubt from any serious person that it is.
This betrays your duplicity. Because he argues that abortion is a state matter while feeling the states should ban it, you argue he is against a woman's choice or opposed to abortion. Because he argues that the death penalty is a state matter while feeling the states should ban it, you argue he supports the death penalty.
Why not argue he supports the war on drugs, liar!
