Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 44

Thread: Paul's office responds: Rand Paul remains silent on $9 Billion dollar giveway to Israel

  1. #1

    Paul's office responds: Rand Paul remains silent on $9 Billion dollar giveway to Israel

    http://libertyfight.com/2012/rand_pa...to_israel.html

    With LewRockwell and Economic Policy Journal picking up the story of the Israeli giveaway, the Rand Paul apologists are performing amazing contortions; claiming it's disingenuous to report the fact that Paul supported $9+Billion loan guarantees to Israel, since the legislation was passed with a voice vote. "You don't even know if he was there!" "He could have said nay!" "Harry Reid is the only person who you can hear saying Yea in the video!" "Rand couldn't have stopped it anyway!" "You're engaged in libel! slander! defamation! against Randy!"

    In reality, this is cut and dried. James Madison had it right- "All men having power ought to be distrusted." Silence is consent, and Rand Paul didn't say one peep in opposition to extending these obscene loan guarantees to a foreign nation, as his father did.

    Paul was indeed in the Senate on Friday June 29th, a fact documented by the numerous recorded votes he participated in that day. A full list is here. The specific votes were roll call votes 169 at 12:53pm, 170 at 1:22pm, 171 at 1:39pm, and 172 at 1:54pm.

    Additionally, I called Rand Paul's Kentucky office on Friday July 13th regarding the matter. They referred me to his D.C. office, (202-224-4343) which they said deals with legislation. The staffer in D.C. answered the phone and I asked him if he could tell me how the Senator voted on S.2165, the United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation Act of 2012. He put me on hold for a minute then came back on the line and said it was a voice vote. (I already knew it was a voice vote, which is why I called in the first place. If it had been a roll call vote, the results could have easily be found without calling the office.) He repeated "it was a voice vote" several times, and I asked if there is a record of how Paul voted in the voice vote. The staffer replied no, and said that voice votes are an "honor system". He could not even tell me if Paul was present for the voice vote. I finally asked if Paul had issued any statement on the matter, like his father did. The staffer said not that he was aware of.

    Furthermore, it's silly to contend that Paul somehow didn't support this aid to Israel or that he couldn't try to stop aid to a foreign country if he wanted to. Paul is currently in the news [here, here and here] for threatening to end aid to Pakistan unless they release Dr. Shakil Afridi, who Paul says was instrumental in the "successful killing of the world's most infamous terrorist", Osama bin Laden.

    In his July 12 press release 'Sen. Paul Declares Intent to Hold Vote on Pakistan Aid', Paul stated, in part,

    "I have worked consistently to bring awareness to Dr. Afridi's plight, and I have offered legislation to deny any current or future foreign assistance to the Pakistani government until they reverse course and free Dr. Afridi. In pursuing a resolution to this situation, I have gained the necessary number of signatures on a cloture petition to force a vote on my legislation on the Senate floor. If Dr. Afridi is not released upon appeal, I will seek such a floor vote at the earliest opportunity. This legislation would deny Pakistan tens of billions of dollars in foreign assistance into the future if Dr. Afridi is not freed-extending through the duration of his 33-year prison sentence, if necessary."

    Even assuming that story and the entire official government line regarding bin laden is true, (a preposterous stretch in itself, but granted for the sake of brevity here), what happened to Rand Paul's alleged principled opposition to "all" foreign aid in general? [ Sen. Rand Paul: We Should End All Foreign Aid To Countries, Including Israel (1/30/11 - includes a video of Rand on CNN's 'Situation Room' with Wolf Blitzer).]

    In a February 2011 interview with ABC News, Paul said that we should end "welfare" to Israel. As Politico reported on 2/04/11,


    "...Paul also defended his calls to end aid to Israel, saying they're just part of his bigger efforts at fiscal responsibility. "I'm not singling out Israel. I support Israel. I want to be known as a friend of Israel, but not with money you don't have," he said. "We can't just borrow from our kids' future and give it to countries, even if they are our friends." And, he said, giving money to the country is especially unwise considering Israel's relative wealth. "I think they're an important ally, but I also think that their per capita income is greater than probably three-fourths of the rest of the world," he said. "Should we be giving free money or welfare to a wealthy nation? I don't think so." [Rand Paul: End 'welfare' to Israel]

    As LibertyFight reported on June 21,

    "Rand Paul is known for advocating reduction of the military budget- but on March 22 2012, Rand appeared on Glenn Beck's show discussing his proposed 5 year budget plan. Asked by Beck about defense spending, Paul noted that he would actually increase military spending increase by cutting four other departments: [4:38] "Instead of having military spending go down, like the sequester would have, ours actually allows for a gradual increase in military spending over time.." Beck's assistant asked Rand for clarification; "Wait a minute. You're actually going to increase military spending?" to which Rand replied an unoquivical "Yes." Despite being the son of the most well known non-interventionist of modern time, Paul voted for sanctions against Iran and has been referred to as a neocon in libertarian clothing." [Ron Paul says GOP is wrong for trying to cut food stamps one week after Rand tried to cut food stamps, 6/21/12.]

    The so-called Republican Liberty Caucus has defended Rand's support of Israel.

    Despite detractors and deniers, this latest "monstrous, warmongering giveaway", as Lew Rockwell calls it, has gotten a lot of attention. Our July 9th article breaking the story is still, nearly a week later, at the top of Google search results for both Rand Paul and Google News Search for Rand Paul. If Rand wants to defend or deny his 9+ Billion dollar financial support of Israel, he certainly has the means to do it. If Paul refuses to explain his support of this bill, he loses what little credibility he has left. While it's true that most of the '100 on the hill' are generally already regarded as trecherous traitors among the liberty-minded, Rand Paul presented himself as someone different. He appealed to libertarians for their support and money in exchange for promotion of constitutional, non-interventionist policies. A non-emperical foreign policy is what will turn this country in the right direction and help us retain our freedoms.

    See also:

    The Senate (Including Rand Paul) Vote to Extend $9 Billion in Loan Guarantees for the Benefit of Israel (Economic Policy Journal)

    Pols Rip-Off Americans for Foreigners, Again (LewRockwell.com)

    Martin Hill is a Catholic paleoconservative and civil rights advocate. His work has been featured on LewRockwell.com, WhatReallyHappened, Infowars, PrisonPlanet, National Motorists Association, WorldNetDaily, The Orange County Register, KNBC4 Los Angeles, Los Angeles Catholic Lay Mission Newspaper, KFI 640, The Press Enterprise, Antiwar.com, IamtheWitness.com, FreedomsPhoenix, Rense, BlackBoxVoting, and many others. Archives can be found at LibertyFight.com



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    If Rand voted No, would that satisfy everyone or are people upset that he didn't make a big deal out of this?

  4. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by tsai3904 View Post
    If Rand voted No, would that satisfy everyone or are people upset that he didn't make a big deal out of this?
    My guess would be the latter. And I would also guess that people here wouldn't be making a peep about this if the bill were called "United States-Great Britain Enhanced Security Cooperation Act of 2012."

  5. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by tsai3904 View Post
    If Rand voted No, would that satisfy everyone or are people upset that he didn't make a big deal out of this?
    No. Rand is a traitor and a piece of $#@!. I don't even know why he is still allowed to have a subforum of his own here...this is supposed to be for Liberty people not neo cons in disguise like him.

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Dissent View Post
    No. Rand is a traitor and a piece of $#@!. I don't even know why he is still allowed to have a subforum of his own here...this is supposed to be for Liberty people not neo cons in disguise like him.
    So apparently there's no "liberty people" in the U.S Senate? Is there any "liberty people" in the house other than Ron Paul?

  7. #6
    When do I get invited to the LR circle jerk? Do I have to wait until Rand gets outvoted 99-1 three times by Friday?
    Knowledge is Liberty!


  8. #7
    If he did cast the only "nay", he would have been the ONLY honorable gentleman present!!!!
    Do you want to know who you are? Don't ask. Act! Action will delineate and define you.
    Thomas Jefferson

  9. #8
    Rand isn't an anarchist...he's just a Republican, and a constitutional conservative. People can either choose to accept that and judge him compared to other senators and in context to other Republicans, or choose not to support him. But he is what he is.



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Traditional Conservative View Post
    My guess would be the latter. And I would also guess that people here wouldn't be making a peep about this if the bill were called "United States-Great Britain Enhanced Security Cooperation Act of 2012."
    Yea, every bill that passes the Senate is unconstitutional so if Rand doesn't issue a press release or issue a hold on every single bill then it means he supports all the unconstitutional bills that pass.
    Last edited by tsai3904; 07-14-2012 at 09:39 PM.

  12. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Dissent View Post
    No. Rand is a traitor and a piece of $#@!. I don't even know why he is still allowed to have a subforum of his own here...this is supposed to be for Liberty people not neo cons in disguise like him.
    I think he's a Liberty person disguised as a neo-con, not the way you have it. He wants to run for major office (president). If he's just Ron Paul II, that can't happen. If he's a "more mainstream Republican version of Ron Paul", as I've heard him described, he can.

  13. #11
    I can't support someone who is not committed to the non-aggression principle... I have a feeling I won't get to participate in a national election ever again

  14. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by July View Post
    Rand isn't an anarchist...he's just a Republican, and a constitutional conservative. People can either choose to accept that and judge him compared to other senators and in context to other Republicans, or choose not to support him. But he is what he is.
    Since when did voting against foreign aid to a nation with a much lower unemployment rate than us, 5.6%, make one an anarchist?

  15. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Dissent View Post
    No. Rand is a traitor and a piece of $#@!. I don't even know why he is still allowed to have a subforum of his own here...this is supposed to be for Liberty people not neo cons in disguise like him.
    Dissent will be taking a month off

  16. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by RickyJ View Post
    Since when did voting against foreign aid to a nation with a much lower unemployment rate than us, 5.6%, make one an anarchist?
    Is this really classified as "foreign aid" when it's actually a loan that has to be paid back with interest?

  17. #15
    The House will be voting on S. 2165, the United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation Act of 2012, on Tuesday, July 17.

    The bill extends loan guarantees made available to Israel for up to $9 billion.

    If you don't support this bill, call your Representative, write letters to your newspapers, organize a protest at your Rep's office, etc. Lead the way for us.

  18. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by RickyJ View Post
    Since when did voting against foreign aid to a nation with a much lower unemployment rate than us, 5.6%, make one an anarchist?
    I didn't say that this in particular did. Just that he does not necessarily share the same philosophy as some of us, and we should therefore try to judge in him context of other senators. (and LewRockwell.com does have An-Cap readership base, who have expressed a lot of disappointment in Rand, which is why I mentioned it)
    Last edited by July; 07-14-2012 at 08:57 PM.



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    I'm skeptical of Rand as I don't have a crystal ball or believe in some conspiracy that he is just pretending to play ball with the GOP.

    Does Rand follow the Austrian School of Economics? That's all that really matters given our current fiscal situation.
    How have you helped spread the message of Liberty, Peace, & Prosperity today?
    "Liberty, when it begins to take root, is a plant of rapid growth." -George Washington

  21. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by MJU1983 View Post
    I'm skeptical of Rand as I don't have a crystal ball or believe in some conspiracy that he is just pretending to play ball with the GOP.

    Does Rand follow the Austrian School of Economics? That's all that really matters given our current fiscal situation.
    Rand follows free market economics, not Austrian.
    Knowledge is Liberty!


  22. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Galileo Galilei View Post
    Rand follows free market economics, not Austrian.
    What does that mean? Paul Krugman claims to support "free market economics" as well.
    How have you helped spread the message of Liberty, Peace, & Prosperity today?
    "Liberty, when it begins to take root, is a plant of rapid growth." -George Washington

  23. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by MJU1983 View Post
    What does that mean? Paul Krugman claims to support "free market economics" as well.
    free market means virtually no regulations on commerce, only enough to set up a civil court system to administer legal disputes. Krugman does not advocate free trade or anything near to it. The Austrians advocate anarchy, which is not free trade either, any more than Captain Kidd, Blackbeard, Black Bart and Genghis Khan did free trade.
    Knowledge is Liberty!


  24. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Galileo Galilei View Post
    Rand follows free market economics, not Austrian.
    Well, its the German schools that are socialist. Austrians are the most free market. That isn't to say greats haven't come from the Classical(especially) and the Chicago schools.

  25. #22
    So does anyone actually have any facts to contribute to this thread?
    I ignore the fact that RP's take back the GOP strategy is working. I ignore the fact that RP accomplished more from his 2008 GOP run than he ever has before. I ignore the fact that 3rd party candidates lose and are a joke to voters. I ignore all this b/c I have an arousing fantasy where RP runs 3rd party in 2012, magically polls at 15%, magically is allowed in the debates, and then magically wins the election. Trust me, it'll work this time.
    - The naive attitude of too many RPF members

  26. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Galileo Galilei View Post
    free market means virtually no regulations on commerce, only enough to set up a civil court system to administer legal disputes. Krugman does not advocate free trade or anything near to it. The Austrians advocate anarchy, which is not free trade either, any more than Captain Kidd, Blackbeard, Black Bart and Genghis Khan did free trade.
    We are talking econ, not government theory.

    Mises and Hayek were not anarchists.

  27. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Galileo Galilei View Post
    free market means virtually no regulations on commerce, only enough to set up a civil court system to administer legal disputes. Krugman does not advocate free trade or anything near to it. The Austrians advocate anarchy, which is not free trade either, any more than Captain Kidd, Blackbeard, Black Bart and Genghis Khan did free trade.
    I said Krugman claims to support free market economics, as you claimed Rand Paul does. Since that has such a broad interpretation, I want some clarification. People are putting a lot of faith in Rand Paul as a future "leader" but if he doesn't have a firm grasp on fiscal/monetary policies like his dad does, what good will he be?

    Regarding the rest of your hyperbole:

    “The measure of the state's success is that the word anarchy frightens people, while the word state does not.” ― Joseph Sobran
    How have you helped spread the message of Liberty, Peace, & Prosperity today?
    "Liberty, when it begins to take root, is a plant of rapid growth." -George Washington



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25
    Rand actions this year have just killed my spirits. I've heard the reasons, but i don't care. What kills me more is that i'm not alone. I notice less activity on this forum, mises, and even Wood's site. All i want to see now is for people to finally stand up to the mess we are in. I'm honestly tired of people controlling others. I'm sick of dealing with play along politics. This country needs a revolution. One that is peaceful on our part until we have to defend ourselves.
    Once more into the fray...
    Into the last good fight I'll ever know.
    Live and die on this day...
    Live and die on this day...

  30. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by AJ Antimony View Post
    So does anyone actually have any facts to contribute to this thread?
    Fact: No one knows whether or not Rand was in the Senate chambers during those SIX seconds when the bill passed by voice vote.

    Fact: The bill had 71 cosponsors. There is absolutely nothing Rand could have done to prevent the bill from passing. If he tried to place a hold on the bill, all it would have taken is 60 Senators voting for cloture to proceed to the bill. All Rand could have done is bring attention to this bill.

    Fact: House will vote on the bill on Tuesday. Anyone who wants to bring attention to this bill can by calling their Representative and organizing protests of their own to get the media to notice.

  31. #27
    The house already passed this bill, so it doesn't make sense that they would vote on it again, unless the Senate changed the wording.

  32. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by Traditional Conservative View Post
    The house already passed this bill, so it doesn't make sense that they would vote on it again, unless the Senate changed the wording.
    I think the Senate did change the wording.

    It's scheduled for a vote on Tuesday:
    http://majorityleader.gov/floor/7-16-12.pdf

  33. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by tsai3904 View Post
    Fact: No one knows whether or not Rand was in the Senate chambers during those SIX seconds when the bill passed by voice vote.

    Fact: The bill had 71 cosponsors. There is absolutely nothing Rand could have done to prevent the bill from passing. If he tried to place a hold on the bill, all it would have taken is 60 Senators voting for cloture to proceed to the bill. All Rand could have done is bring attention to this bill.

    Fact: House will vote on the bill on Tuesday. Anyone who wants to bring attention to this bill can by calling their Representative and organizing protests of their own to get the media to notice.
    Thanks! It's almost like... facts are good.
    I ignore the fact that RP's take back the GOP strategy is working. I ignore the fact that RP accomplished more from his 2008 GOP run than he ever has before. I ignore the fact that 3rd party candidates lose and are a joke to voters. I ignore all this b/c I have an arousing fantasy where RP runs 3rd party in 2012, magically polls at 15%, magically is allowed in the debates, and then magically wins the election. Trust me, it'll work this time.
    - The naive attitude of too many RPF members

  34. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by MJU1983 View Post
    I'm skeptical of Rand as I don't have a crystal ball or believe in some conspiracy that he is just pretending to play ball with the GOP.

    Does Rand follow the Austrian School of Economics? That's all that really matters given our current fiscal situation.
    I don't know how one would pretend to play ball with the GOP...you kinda do, or you don't. But really the only way to find out what Rand thinks is to research him and follow his speeches, interviews, writings, votes, etc.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-07-2013, 07:08 PM
  2. Rand Paul pledges $9+ Billion to Israel [Mod Note: speculation]
    By donnay in forum World News & Affairs
    Replies: 132
    Last Post: 07-13-2012, 09:13 AM
  3. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 05-11-2012, 11:25 PM
  4. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 08-25-2011, 04:02 PM
  5. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-26-2007, 02:56 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •