Will a Jeff Flake Victory help the Liberty Movement?

So, based on mine and Lucille's links.

Flake voted against the 2012 NDAA(vote held in Dec 2011) but for the 2013 NDAA(vote held in May 2012).
 

Lucille the vote you linked to is the NDAA for 2013. There is nothing about indefinite detention in that bill, IIRC. It was the previous year's bill where the issue is. Flake voted "nay" on that bill. The roll call from that is linked above me by GA Avenger.
 
Last edited:
For the last time, Flake voted YAY on the NDAA (which states that America is a battlefield...well, the whole planet really), and yes to indefinite detention of American citizens.

House Vote Upholds Indefinite Detention of Terror Suspects
By JONATHAN WEISMAN
Published: May 18, 2012

WASHINGTON — The House on Friday turned back an unusual coalition of liberals and conservatives and voted down legislation to reject explicitly the indefinite detention of terrorism suspects apprehended on United States soil.

House lawmakers then approved a broad military policy bill that would break Pentagon spending caps agreed to just last summer.

The bill, the National Defense Authorization Act for the fiscal year that begins in October, makes clear that House Republicans — and many Democrats — are opposed to including the Pentagon in the coming era of fiscal austerity. The $642 billion measure, approved 299 to 120 [Flake voted YAY!], exceeds spending limits enshrined in the Budget Control Act of 2011 by $8 billion.

The measure would thwart the Obama administration’s efforts to close the military prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, and would impede its ability to carry out the nuclear arms reduction treaty ratified by the Senate in 2010.

The Defense Authorization Act is required each year to set Pentagon policy and spending levels, but House Republicans have turned it into a showcase for their opposition to Obama administration policies.

This year, Democratic leaders had some surprise support. Representative Justin Amash of Michigan, a Tea Party-backed freshman Republican, teamed up with Representative Adam Smith, Democrat of Washington, to declare that terrorism suspects apprehended on United States soil should not be detained indefinitely without charge or trial.

But the left-right coalition fizzled in the face of charges that the two lawmakers were coddling terrorists. On the 238-to-182 [Flake voted NAY] vote against the amendment, as many Democrats — 19 — voted against it as Republicans voted for it.
 
Last edited:
not everyone just a loud minority

At what point did RPF become the be all to end all of the liberty movement? Like I said many times before, this movement is much larger than what happens here on RPF and DP. Some folks here just need to come to the realization that not everyone is going to agree with you all the time.
 
At what point did RPF become the be all to end all of the liberty movement? Like I said many times before, this movement is much larger than what happens here on RPF and DP. Some folks here just need to come to the realization that not everyone is going to agree with you all the time.

You've spent more time posting about disagreeing than you have explaining why Jeff Flake is so awesome. Perhaps there's a lesson there.
 
For the last time, Flake voted YAY on the NDAA (which states that America is a battlefield...well, the whole planet really), and yes to indefinite detention of American citizens.

House Vote Upholds Indefinite Detention of Terror Suspects
By JONATHAN WEISMAN
Published: May 18, 2012

You're right that he voted against the Smith-Amash amendment, but he has spoken out in favor of withdrawing from Afghanistan.

Edit: I see that you edited your post. I was responding to your original post in which you said that Flake voted for never ending war.
 
Last edited:
You've spent more time posting about disagreeing than you have explaining why Jeff Flake is so awesome. Perhaps there's a lesson there.

Flake has a decent record over his tenure in Congress. If you read some articles about his career you'll see that he was considered by many respectable publications (Reason, New American, et al) as one of the strongest libertarian voices in the House. Look at the hundreds of votes he has cast since he was a freshman. He is an asset and will be a strong ally of Rand, DeMint and Lee.

Is he perfect? No and neither is Ron Paul. I don't seek perfection. I seek someone who shares the same general principles that I do and I will support them with my time and/or money. It is the reason I supported Paul in 08 and 12, it's the reason I supported DeMint in his last Senate run, and it's the reason I'll support Flake, Cruz and others this year.
 
Last edited:
At what point did RPF become the be all to end all of the liberty movement? Like I said many times before, this movement is much larger than what happens here on RPF and DP. Some folks here just need to come to the realization that not everyone is going to agree with you all the time.

That's fine, tbone. But, don't be surprised if we won't quietly allow our message to be co-opted. RP's supporters coined the term, liberty movement, and sorry, but supporters of indefinite detention for American citizens are not a part of it.
 
Note: I actually discourage people donating to him. Money would be better spent on other races. Flake has it locked up.

Here's an idea: Look at Jon Kyle and Jeff Flake, and look at all the issues at where Flake is an improvement. I listed many issues above where Flake is on the right side with regards to civil liberties/foreign policy, including the war on drugs, sanctions, warrant less searches and foreign aid, and Flake is prolific for being a fiscal hawk. So the OP is right, Flake will be helpful for the liberty movement.

Going forward: All we have to do is try to get Flake to help out on important issues. Nobody has to love him.

Why aren't people criticizing Jon Kyle around here? That would make more sense.
 
Last edited:
At what point did RPF become the be all to end all of the liberty movement? Like I said many times before, this movement is much larger than what happens here on RPF and DP. Some folks here just need to come to the realization that not everyone is going to agree with you all the time.

And some people need to come to the realization that just because someone is acceptable in a few economic areas, it does not translate to them sticking up for the liberty movement.
 
I know I'll sleep better down at GITMO knowing Jeff Flake is fighting the good fight in the Senate against freakin' earmarks!

He voted YAY! on drones from sea to shining sea too.

The PAC shouldn't waste its money. Too bad they're not throwing a cool million at Kurt Bills or some other more deserving candidate.
 
Last edited:
Flake has a decent record over his tenure in Congress. If you read some articles about his career you'll see that he was considered by many respectable publications (Reason, New American, et al) as one of the strongest libertarian voices in the House.
He has gone downhill from what he used to be. His most recent score was 70%.
 
Note: I actually discourage people donating to him. Money would be better spent on other races. Flake has it locked up.

Here's an idea: Look at Jon Kyle and Jeff Flake, and look at all the issues at where Flake is an improvement. I listed many issues above where Flake is on the right side with regards to civil liberties/foreign policy, including the war on drugs, sanctions, warrant less searches and foreign aid, and Flake is prolific for being a fiscal hawk. So the OP is right, Flake will be helpful for the liberty movement.

Going forward: All we have to do is try to get Flake to help out on important issues. Nobody has to love him.

Why aren't people criticizing Jon Kyle around here? That would make more sense.

Because I don't see anyone around here pushing him.

I don't hate Flake. He is better than a lot of them. I just won't herald him as a liberty candidate, because he simply is not. I do want him to win his race, because his competition is worse.

Flake used to be better than he is. I don't know what happened to him.
 
I think if the OP would have just put "good for fiscal conservatives movement" instead of "liberty movement", I dont think anyone would have objected. I was a fan of Flake before I knew who Ron Paul was. He is a principled fiscal conservative(except when it comes to military spending and Aid to Israel), not a liberty anything kind of politicians and that should be enough to sell him on this forum.
 
I think if the OP would have just put "good for fiscal conservatives movement" instead of "liberty movement", I dont think anyone would have objected. I was a fan of Flake before I knew who Ron Paul was. He is a principled fiscal conservative(except when it comes to military spending and Aid to Israel), not a liberty anything kind of politicians and that should be enough to sell him on this forum.

Yeah, I must admit that was what set me off. Although, the above is a huge exception. lol
 
Back
Top