Why Doesn't Ron Paul Abstain More?
---
The story:
The U.S. House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed a resolution strongly defending how Israel has repelled rocket attacks.The post by a Paul supporter:
The non-binding resolution, passed 404-1 on Wednesday, was substantially rewritten since its introduction in January to include a strident defense of recent Israeli tactics in the Gaza Strip.
...
The sole vote against was U.S. Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) who preaches the reduction of U.S. involvement in overseas conflicts.
Ron Paul is the only member of the house [sic] to oppose US taxpayer funding of Israel's occupation of Gaza and war against Palestinian civilians.The response by me:
This wasn't a funding bill. It was a non-binding resolution.Discuss.
I would think that, by Paul's standards, the only "honorable" vote for any non-binding resolution would be to abstain (i.e., because the vote itself is a waste of time).
To vote "No" is, I would think, just as "dishonorable" as to vote "Yes."
All Related Posts (on one page) | Some Related Posts:
Posted by Kip on
5 March 2008
To comment on this post, please visit the new blogsite.