cajuncocoa
Banned
- Joined
- May 15, 2007
- Messages
- 16,013
Thank you for providing the link to the actual bill. Having looked at it, I see no reason now that Ron might not support it.
Rand introduces bill to defund Palestinian foreign aid
- Thread starter Matt Collins
- Start date
willwash
Member
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2007
- Messages
- 1,616
Why, why why, WHY WHY
Do we always feel the need to caveat all statements about foreign aid with a "well, does this statement that you just made, does it apply to Israel?"
What the FUCK is so special about Israel that all statements about foreign aid have to be two-part statements, one for Israel, and one for everyone else?
Do we always feel the need to caveat all statements about foreign aid with a "well, does this statement that you just made, does it apply to Israel?"
What the FUCK is so special about Israel that all statements about foreign aid have to be two-part statements, one for Israel, and one for everyone else?
Well, the title of the bill has Israel in it, "This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Defend Israel by Defunding Palestinian Foreign Aid Act of 2015’’."
The bill has nothing to do with the Iron Dome, yet you brought it up because ??????? If you want to talk about that vote I'm sure there is already a thread about it where you can discuss it all you want.
phill4paul
Member
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2007
- Messages
- 46,967
That's the reason? So if they withdraw the request funds will flow?
'nuff said.
"Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations-entangling alliances with none."
Gotta be kidding me that this is spun as an acceptable reason to stop funding.
Because Rand said he approved of those funds for the Iron Dome and it has to do with this bill because it shows he is either ignorant of the reasons given why were attacked on 9/11, or he is ignoring those reasons despite knowing them. If he is starting with cutting foreign aid, he should start with countries that knew about the 9/11 attacks beforehand, and didn't warn us.
Any reason is an acceptable reason to stop funding. Or do you support foreign aid?
This isn't the first time he tried to end foreign aid for a particular nation and again this bill has nothing to do with the Iron Dome, you are the only one making that connection.
William Tell
Member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2014
- Messages
- 12,146
Thanks!
Just FYI Collins had it linked in his OP, but it was not an obvious link. Just blue letters, so I can see why you missed it.So, why are you asking people if they support foreign aid, when Rand does? If this is ONLY about Palestine, then why did Rand put Israel's name in it? Oh, right....pandering propaganda that won't matter a hill of beans.
Rand Paul does support foreign aid, and he does it to a country that makes us less safe in doing so. It has nothing to do with being anti-Israel, but everything to do with keeping the country safe. Rand Paul apparently even supports foreign aid to Palestine, as long as they don't try to join the ICC. So, Rand supports foreign aid, just on his terms to certain people.
This bill has Israel in its title. Have you not read the reasons given why they attacked us on 9/11? Clearly Rand Paul hasn't or doesn't care and ignores it as his/our own risk.
Nothing is derailed, other than your off topic posts (like this one) and ones that can't/don't answer basic questions. Have you read the reasons given why "they" attacked us on 9/11?
Rand Paul included Israel in the short title of this bill, specifically, "Defend Israel...". His bill will allow aid to continue to Palestine, if they meet HIS requirements. So, Rand Paul is apparently for foreign aid under his own terms and conditions applied to only one people group in this very bill? Because of his own entangling alliance with Israel? Why else have Israel's name in it?
Maybe Rand Paul was against foreign aid, before he was for it...kind of the opposite of John Kerry in 2004?
But, considering you're pretty sure banging your head against a wall would be more productive than your continuing spinning low information posts and not answering basic questions in this thread, I think we now know that confirms you are what you accused others of being in this thread....
Matt Collins
Member
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2007
- Messages
- 47,707
phill4paul
Member
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2007
- Messages
- 46,967
No. It is not. To stop funding over entangling alliances is as bad as funding over entangling alliances. Perceptions create enemies.
Revolution9
Member
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2007
- Messages
- 9,323
You people need to get a grip. You are living in a fantasy world of wrong choices and fake trojan horses, bogus foreign policy and aid funding issues. People will die and children carry horrid scars for life because of vagaries of argument in regards to the subtleties of some bill or other being passed that you heatedly debate as though you were deciding on chocolate or vanilla with your all american apple pie. There are two or three actually sane and humane people on this thread. The rest have your heads up your asses from pretzeling your morals to make excuses..any excuse..and are sucked into the political whirlwind, blinded by metaphors and silly policy distinctions.. I was Ron Paul grassroots whip in 2008 and 2012. I will not lift a finger for this zionist shill Rand. I hope the Palestinians take the bloody anti-semites of Israel before an international court before they all run to their homeland in Ukraine. You will be the only ones looking at your coffin lid on that final day...The day of your judgment by your higher self. May your souls rest easy...should you find you way back out of the political matrix and back into the soul of a living and breathing sovereign human who values the human race...all of it. I know mine will because i am consistent in my defense of those needing it. Watch this video above and know you are complicit with your pretzel logic.
Rev9
The bills that Ron opposed that were good on the surface were bills that had a heck of a lot of pork underneath. In this case if the bill is strictly dealing with cutting aid to a foreign entity without increasing much spending elsewhere, there's no reason in my mind to believe that he wouldn't support such a bill. Even if the bill ensures existing funding to one entity, but didn't increase the overall budget I still think he would support it. Of course I can't speak with him, but he was strongly consistent in his approach and based off that I think it gives one a pretty good idea of how he may or may not vote on any particular bill.
Actually, Ron would add earmarks or pork to many of the bills himself, but still vote against them.
But, the problem is that in this case the bill isn't simply dealing with cutting foreign aid, but attaching "Do as I say" to the foreign aid. Ron wasn't much for telling other countries what they could do, so I can say that he would most likely vote against this bill. Based on his record.
If the bill was a straight up/down "Stop foreign aid to Palestine, because we can't afford it." He might vote yes. This isn't that though.
it places conditions on the foreign aid, which means that then foreign aid is ok? still, the bill should be supported. but it's a bad bill, it is pandering to Israel in a shameless way. if Schumer had introduced it, then sure vote yes. but to sponsor it is not good.
Eh I disagree, if you're accomplishing something good for the wrong reasons you're still accomplishing something good.
NYPD protest is a good example.
Last edited:
Similar threads
