paulg_68 posted:
What are the negative consequences of Ron Paul not voting on this bill?
I think it sends a pretty clear message about his priorities. Apparently campaigning for a better job is more important than showing up to register opposition to what is clearly an awful bill from a libertarian point of view.
Being there and voting "no" is always going to have a greater impact than saying "oh I'd probably vote no if I wasn't too busy trying to get another job instead of doing my current one" like he did.
If ever there was a time to take a principled stand - which Ron Paul has made his career supposedly doing, if you talk to Ron Paul supporters - this was it. Instead the timing was bad so he didn't bother to show up.
You can spin and spin and spin but it doesn't change the fact that he decided it was better to campaign for another job than vote no against an awful bill totally at odds with his political views.
If he really cared about the issue he would be back in washington on the floor giving them hell. Instead he's shaking the hands of a bunch of morons in Iowa.
