PDA

View Full Version : why didn't ron vote on FISA today




haaaylee
06-20-2008, 08:55 PM
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll437.xml

Danke
06-20-2008, 08:58 PM
To dissapoint electronicmaji

tomveil
06-20-2008, 09:10 PM
He was in Montana, I believe.

Knightskye
06-20-2008, 10:29 PM
What's actually upsetting, though, is that Pelosi voted Yes on it. Telecom immunity, another bite out the 4th Amendment, and she votes yes.

Can we impeach her already?

BenIsForRon
06-21-2008, 12:10 AM
Obama supports the bill, though he says we can rest assured he will hold the telecom companies accountable when he's in office... right....

AJ Antimony
06-21-2008, 12:33 AM
What's actually upsetting, though, is that Pelosi voted Yes on it. Telecom immunity, another bite out the 4th Amendment, and she votes yes.

Can we impeach her already?

San Francisco drones will probably re-elect her by 90%

AJ Antimony
06-21-2008, 12:33 AM
Obama supports the bill, though he says we can rest assured he will hold the telecom companies accountable when he's in office... right....

http://felipeta.files.wordpress.com/2007/07/penn-and-teller-bullshit.jpg

szczebrzeszyn
06-21-2008, 12:47 AM
He was in Montana, I believe.

Yes,

Jesse Benton Says:
June 20th, 2008 at 4:17 pm

Dr. Paul missed the vote today because he had a longstanding commitment to speak at the Montana GOP Convention today.

anaconda
06-21-2008, 02:15 AM
San Francisco drones will probably re-elect her by 90%

Cindy Sheehan is running for her seat.

fletcher
06-21-2008, 07:59 AM
What's actually upsetting, though, is that Pelosi voted Yes on it. Telecom immunity, another bite out the 4th Amendment, and she votes yes.

Can we impeach her already?

Why do you care how Pelosi votes? 95+% of her votes are wrong. Why would you expect different?

sidster
06-21-2008, 09:44 AM
What's actually upsetting, though, is that Pelosi voted Yes on it. Telecom immunity, another bite out the 4th Amendment, and she votes yes.

Can we impeach her already?


We should introduce her to this guy as a "traitor" :D


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6a/Michael_Reagan_side.jpg/200px-Michael_Reagan_side.jpg

LibertyEagle
06-21-2008, 12:01 PM
What's actually upsetting, though, is that Pelosi voted Yes on it. Telecom immunity, another bite out the 4th Amendment, and she votes yes.

Can we impeach her already?

Upsetting, I understand. But, it's not really surprising to anyone, is it? She's a socialist, therefore she's all for anything that will increase big government control over We the People.

SLSteven
06-21-2008, 12:06 PM
What's actually upsetting, though, is that Pelosi voted Yes on it. Telecom immunity, another bite out the 4th Amendment, and she votes yes.

Can we impeach her already?

Barack told her it was ok.

lasenorita
06-21-2008, 12:20 PM
He did comment on it back in March: Ron Paul's Statement on H.R. 3773 - FISA Amendments Act of 2008 (http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2008/cr031408h.htm).

HOLLYWOOD
06-21-2008, 12:32 PM
Cindy Sheehan is running for her seat.

Inside SCOOP...

Sheehan better get herself the most Ruthless Campaign manager and alot of BUCKS!

Pelosi, will eat her alive! Pelosi is a Stealth ZIONIST with massive WEALTH backing her. She is a Demanding Dictator with a lot of hidden powers and corporate backers.

Pelosi is as Scummy as they come... boy did she and the Democratic Swing Election in 2006 SAVED this country and put it on the right track, NOT! They are pure Amnesty Sleazeballs...

I pray for Cindy Sheehan... she's got a massive uphill battle against the FEM-NAZI, PELOSI!

CINDY SHEEHAN should be a Special Guest Speaker at the CFL Liberty Conference/Rally in St. Paul/Minneapolis MN this September.

CFL Marketing and Sales... get on this! It's pathetic that I have to even remind the CFL Amateurs.

jlaker
06-21-2008, 12:37 PM
San Francisco drones will probably re-elect her by 90%

:eek: I hope not!

AFM
06-21-2008, 03:35 PM
Paul was getting laid with some fly libertarian bitches

Truth Warrior
06-21-2008, 03:37 PM
Would Ron's vote have changed anything?

acptulsa
06-21-2008, 03:48 PM
Would Ron's vote have changed anything?

You know the answer to that. It's just that Dr. Paul missing a vote is as rare and newsworthy as McCain showing up for work or Obama actually saying yea or nay, instead of just "present".

Truth Warrior
06-21-2008, 03:51 PM
You know the answer to that. It's just that Dr. Paul missing a vote is as rare and newsworthy as McCain showing up for work or Obama actually saying yea or nay, instead of just "present". I'll bet Ron has his reasons. I won't second guess him on it. ;)

Leadman584
06-21-2008, 03:51 PM
The doctor was busy with a house call for the cause of Liberty.

I was amazed that the lone republican no, was not Ron Paul.
The Dr. could have talked himself purple and changed nothing in the company of criminals.
He chose instead to recruit more jurors.

haaaylee
06-21-2008, 04:27 PM
I was amazed that the lone republican no, was not Ron Paul.



exactly.

Leadman584
06-22-2008, 12:19 AM
When faced with a Tsunami, do you stand alone on the beach, sword in hand, or do you fall back and recruit people to fill sandbags. That pretty much sums up the Dr's choices.
He committed to speaking at the Montana GOP some time ago. For the sake of history, I would have liked to have his nay vote on this issue. For the sake of all of our futures, I'm glad he chose instead to spread the message of freedom.

OhioMichael
06-25-2008, 06:06 AM
Statement on FISA

by Ron Paul

Statement on HR 6304, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Amendments before the US House of Representatives, June 20, 2008

Mr. Speaker, I regret that due to the unexpected last-minute appearance of this measure on the legislative calendar this week, a prior commitment has prevented me from voting on the FISA amendments. I have strongly opposed every previous FISA overhaul attempt and I certainly would have voted against this one as well.

The main reason I oppose this latest version is that it still clearly violates the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution by allowing the federal government to engage in the bulk collection of American citizens’ communications without a search warrant. That US citizens can have their private communication intercepted by the government without a search warrant is anti-American, deeply disturbing, and completely unacceptable.

In addition to gutting the fourth amendment, this measure will deprive Americans who have had their rights violated by telecommunication companies involved in the Administration’s illegal wiretapping program the right to seek redress in the courts for the wrongs committed against them. Worse, this measure provides for retroactive immunity, whereby individuals or organizations that broke the law as it existed are granted immunity for prior illegal actions once the law has been changed. Ex post facto laws have long been considered anathema in free societies under rule of law. Our Founding Fathers recognized this, including in Article I section 9 of the Constitution that “No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.” How is this FISA bill not a variation of ex post facto? That alone should give pause to supporters of this measure.

Mr. Speaker, we should understand that decimating the protections that our Constitution provides us against the government is far more dangerous to the future of this country than whatever external threats may exist. We can protect this country without violating the Constitution and I urge my colleagues to reconsider their support for this measure.