20080105

your "champion of the constitution"?

ron paul, again wrong on the constitution [my non-ellipsis edits in brackets correct transcript; video here, quoted section beginning at 7:55]:
RON PAUL: [...] I mean, the idea of a theocracy very much annoys me. And--

BILL MOYERS: Do you see Michael Huckabee in that direction? You don't--

RON PAUL: He hasn't said anything specifically that I would say we got to defeat Mike [Huckabee because] I think he's a theocrat. I haven't said that. But I think that there are a lot of people who may interpret it that way.

BILL MOYERS: And are you nervous?

RON PAUL: I'm nervous about the way [our] country is going, because they don't understand the First Amendment, you know. Because I'm a strong defender of the First Amendment and [that says] the Congress shall write no laws, and that's what I think is the most important thing. I sometimes even worry [about how they've]... I don't like the idea that Mitt Romney might lose, you know, because of his religious beliefs. And if you understand the First Amendment, we shouldn't even be asking him what his [___] religious belief is. So, I'm sympathetic with that, and I don't like [that,] the way he's been treated, or at least subtly behind the scenes and how people might react to that, because with the First Amendment says we're not supposed to dealing in that, and that [should never] be a litmus test for being elected.
first amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
ron paul:
And if you understand the First Amendment, we shouldn't even be asking him what his [___] religious belief is. So, I'm sympathetic with that, and I don't like [that,] the way he's been treated, or at least subtly behind the scenes and how people might react to that, because with the First Amendment says we're not supposed to dealing in that, [...]
show me where it says that. don't tell me about the "supreme" court. show me where in the first amendment one may find the bit that says the press or "we the people" shouldn't be questioning a presidential candidate's religious beliefs (purported or otherwise). it isn't there, yet ron paul forwards this populist dreck on the heels of annunciating, correctly, the base of the first amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting [...]"

then he continues down the "my version of the constitution" path (see full quote above for context):
[...] and that shouldn't be a litmus test for being elected.
hell if it shouldn't. the constitution's being misconstrued yet again by the "champion" of it. the law:
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
neither a potential voter nor the press inquiring intently regarding a politician's religion — even for the purpose of voters excluding him based upon that answer — violates the religious test clause of the constitution; it wasn't required for qualification to the office. arguing otherwise leads to a fun logical destination: the constitution prohibits you from voting against a man based on his publicly avowed religious beliefs. ron paul:
[...] And I think they have a right to know what your religion is. But it [shouldn't] be a test. And I think for some individuals it becomes a test. But I don't think we've quite gotten to the point where we have to make a public statement of what our religious beliefs are, or the rejection of our religious beliefs. I think the most important thing is to make sure they understand the First Amendment.
there's your guy, paulists. making up his supposedly proper contravention of the constitution as he goes, just as he's done with immigration, abortion, afghanistan, "social security", health care, food stamps, subsidies for "his" district, and the general welfare clause with regard to his "tax credit" PR scams.

forget natural law; ron paul can't even get man-made law straight, as he continues to rape you for his salary while preaching "liberty".

Labels: ,