Senate vote 100-0

[Fredom101]

I think Rand just voted yes to save face with the establishment. He knew his vote VS 99 others wouldn't make a difference. In the future, if he does run for president maybe he won't face the problems that Ron does as an "outsider", I think that's his plan.

So basically, Rand doesn't feel the need to stand on principles.

 

[Sola_Fide]

Meh. Rand has said he would support sanctions on Iran from the time he was running for senate. He said it on the OReilly show. He has been consistent on this, but consistently wrong. A lot of us disagreed when he was saying it back then.

This is one of the glaring black marks with Rand for me. It won't cause me to stop supporting him, but I think he is following instead of leading on this issue...and that is out of character because he usually does get out and lead on most issues.

 

[erowe1]

strategy[/b] and not what Rand really believes.

Why does it matter what he really believes? What matters is what he does, not how he feels in the hidden recesses of his heart while doing it. I heard a lot of people on the left saying similar things to defend Obama's support for warrantless wiretapping, as if they thought he'd change back to what he really believed after getting elected president or something.

 

[xFiFtyOnE]

So basically, Rand doesn't feel the need to stand on principles.

Sometimes you have to do things you don't like to make sure you have a future. Politics is a dirty game.

 

[kylejack]

Sanctions kill people. Our sanctions on Iraq killed tens of thousands, maybe more.

 

[Fredom101]

Why does it matter what he really believes? What matters is what he does, not how he feels in the hidden recesses of his heart while doing it. I heard a lot of people on the left saying similar things to defend Obama's support for warrantless wiretapping, as if they thought he'd change back to what he really believed after getting elected president or something.

Exactly. Remember, Obama voted twice for the Iraq war, yet, everyone that voted for him somehow thought he was anti-war. "He was just doing that to appease the neocons. When he gets in their he'll end the wars." Let's not fall for that trap.

 

[GeorgiaAvenger]

Won't affect my vote whatsoever. I couldn't care less.

 

[Fredom101]

Why does it matter what he really believes? What matters is what he does, not how he feels in the hidden recesses of his heart while doing it. I heard a lot of people on the left saying similar things to defend Obama's support for warrantless wiretapping, as if they thought he'd change back to what he really believed after getting elected president or something.

Exactly. Remember, Obama voted twice for the Iraq war, yet, everyone that voted for him somehow thought he was anti-war. "He was just doing that to appease the neocons. When he gets in their he'll end the wars." Let's not fall for that trap.

 

[ShaneEnochs]

Sometimes you have to do things you don't like to make sure you have a future. Politics is a dirty game.

Ron did things that he knew his district would hate, yet they kept reelecting him.

 

[Feeding the Abscess]

Sad that when Ron leaves Congress, there won't be a single non-interventionist in the entire Congress, save for Kwiatkowski managing to make it in.

 

[kylejack]

Iraq sanctions, which included the same supposed exemption for food and medical supplies:

Estimates of deaths due to sanctions

Estimates of excess deaths during sanctions vary depending on the source. The estimates vary [31][38] due to differences in methodologies, and specific time-frames covered.[39] A short listing of estimates follows:

Unicef: 500,000 children (including sanctions, collateral effects of war). "[As of 1999] [c]hildren under 5 years of age are dying at more than twice the rate they were ten years ago."[31][40]
Former U.N. Humanitarian Coordinator in Iraq Denis Halliday: "Two hundred thirty-nine thousand children 5 years old and under" as of 1998.[41]
"probably ... 170,000 children", Project on Defense Alternatives, "The Wages of War", 20. October 2003[42]
350,000 excess deaths among children "even using conservative estimates", Slate Explainer, "Are 1 Million Children Dying in Iraq?", 9. October 2001.[43]
Economist Michael Spagat: "very likely to be [less than] than half a million children." He claims that these estimates are unable to isolate the effects of sanctions alone due to the lack of "anything resembling a controlled experiment".[44]
"Richard Garfield, a Columbia University nursing professor ... cited the figures 345,000-530,000 for the entire 1990-2002 period"[45] for sanctions-related excess deaths.[46]
Zaidi, S. and Fawzi, M. C. S., (1995) The Lancet British medical journal: 567,000 children.[47] A co-author (Zaidi) did a follow-up study in 1996, finding "much lower ... mortality rates ... for unknown reasons."[48]
Former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark: 1.5 million (includes sanctions, bombs and other weapons, depleted uranium poisoning).[49]
Iraqi Baathist government: 1.5 million.[29]
Iraqi Cultural Minister Hammadi: 1.7 million (includes sanctions, bombs and other weapons, depleted uranium poisoning)[50]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_sanctions#Estimates_of_deaths_due_to_sanctions

This was a 100-0 vote to kill potentially hundreds of thousands of children.

 

[ZanZibar]

Matter of fact or opinion? I think the Japanese would have a different opinion.

I think that was a blockade which is very different than a sanction.

 

[ZanZibar]

Ron disagrees with you.

International law is at odds with him here.

 

[erowe1]

International law is at odds with him here.

Who wrote this international law? And where did they ever get the authority to do that?

 

[kylejack]

I think that was a blockade which is very different than a sanction.

Except that these sanctions are essentially an economic blockade. The sanctions apply to foreign banks and companies as well. We're banning the world from doing business with Iran except on exempt items.

 

[Steve-in-NY]

Would 99-Yes, 1-No really make a difference?

Would emptying a magazine into Godzilla make a difference if he was rampaging through your city?
No, but at least you tried.

I'd probably feel better.

 

[PreDeadMan]

I regret donating to his campaign.

Im requesting to be removed from his mailing list the next time he sends me another request for money. I suggest everyone to do the same if you agree and dont forget to tell them why youre doing it.

same here...

 

[McDermit]

This is why I will never be as excited about Rand Paul for president as Ron Paul.

This.

Not to say I wouldn't consider voting for him... but I'd never support him the way I support Ron.

This is a disappointing vote.

 

[kylejack]

Rand might be someone to hold your nose and vote for over another worse candidate, but I can't imagine ever giving him a dime when he's voting for things that are literally going to kill a bunch of children.

 

[NIU Students for Liberty]

Sometimes you have to do things you don't like to make sure you have a future. Politics is a dirty game.

And yet his father survived the game to poll first in Iowa and third nationally because he stood by his principles.