Yes! Rand to vote against emergency declaration

[Warlord]

Way to go Rand. This is a tough vote and the sort of thing Collins has called for:

https://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...cy-declaration

It's the top of Drudge too

[acptulsa]

In b4 the shylls tell us Rand is wrong to uphold the Constitution.

[acptulsa]

In b4 the shylls tell us Rand is wrong to uphold the Constitution.

Made it (barely)!

If Republicans won't vote for an upholder of the Constitution, then what this nation needs is a conservative political party.

[axiomata]

Sometimes you got to break the constitution to uphold the constitution don't you know

[TomtheTinker]

Good for Rand. Somebody has to stand up to the hypocrisy of the right.

[kahless]

This is an "emergency" declaration. The keyword being "emergency".

He just killed his political future with Republican voters. He may have pleased his open borders donors but not the voters in his home state or nationally if he plans to run for President again. Democrats will never vote for him no matter what he does.

[TomtheTinker]

This is an "emergency" declaration. The keyword being "emergency".

He just killed his political future with Republican voters. He may have pleased his open borders donors but not the voters in his home state or nationally if he plans to run for President again. Democrats will never vote for him no matter what he does.

I'm not an open border supporter and support this move. Using words so loosely to the point they don't have meaning in an effort to give yourself powers you're not meant to have is dangerous. Sometimes you can support something but take a stand against the way it's getting done.

[acptulsa]

Sometimes you can support something but take a stand against the way it's getting done.

Not if you're a good team player.

Obviously you are not. Good for you. Good team players are the bricks out of which tyranny is built.

[nikcers]

Not if you're a good team player.

Obviously you are not. Good for you. Good team players are the bricks out of which tyranny is built.

Yeah but the people are only going to hear the talking points and they are going to use this against him the same way they did the Israel foreign aid.

[nikcers]

This is an "emergency" declaration. The keyword being "emergency". He just killed his political future with Republican voters. He may have pleased his open borders donors but not the voters in his home state or nationally if he plans to run for President again. Democrats will never vote for him no matter what he does.

The same Democrats we tried to win over in 2016 are going to vote for the pied Piper Democrat like they did last time. Trump is doing the right thing politically whether you support the wall or not he promised a wall in 2016 and people like people who at least try to do what they promised. Plus it gives him the ability to say no to anything the Democrats want, they are going to want something from him eventually. That and it also gives him room to say no to the immigration boondoggle. If he becomes Democrat lite because of this then his base will desert him for being gutless.

[Superfluous Man]

This is an "emergency" declaration. The keyword being "emergency".

He just killed his political future with Republican voters. He may have pleased his open borders donors but not the voters in his home state or nationally if he plans to run for President again. Democrats will never vote for him no matter what he does.

I agree with you about that, at least in the current political climate, this will hurt Rand more than it helps him. But that's not why he's doing it. He's doing it because it's the right thing to do. His oath to uphold the Constitution obligates him to vote this way, and you know that. When we supported him in 2010, it was with the hope that he would follow in his father's footsteps with votes like this.

[kahless]

I agree with you about that, at least in the current political climate, this will hurt Rand more than it helps him. But that's not why he's doing it. He's doing it because it's the right thing to do. His oath to uphold the Constitution obligates him to vote this way, and you know that. When we supported him in 2010, it was with the hope that he would follow in his father's footsteps with votes like this.

Some do not see this as an invasion and security threat that it is, I get that. So how about I put it this way. Lets say there was a foreign army flowing across the border. Do you really want to deny the President emergency powers in that situation and wait for Congress to dick around before something is done?

[nikcers]

Some do not see this as an invasion and security threat that it is, I get that. So how about I put it this way. Lets say there was a foreign army flowing across the border. Do you really want to deny the President emergency powers in that situation and wait for Congress to dick around before something is done?

The same Congress that has done nothing about the wall or immigration no matter which party has control? I feel like they could be bringing the plague and they would be doing nothing about it. Probably all the kick backs from plague medicine.

[Superfluous Man]

This would not be a case of waiting for Congress to act. Congress has already acted and passed a budget deliberately allocating only about $1.4 billion for a border wall.

[Stratovarious]

I agree with you about that, at least in the current political climate, this will hurt Rand more than it helps him. But that's not why he's doing it. He's doing it because it's the right thing to do. His oath to uphold the Constitution obligates him to vote this way, and you know that. When we supported him in 2010, it was with the hope that he would follow in his father's footsteps with votes like this.

LMAO , now it's a 'Constitutional thing' with you . ''It's the right thing to do''


Good lord do you deliver.

[acptulsa]

LMAO , now it's a 'Constitutional thing' with you . ''It's the right thing to do''


Good lord do you deliver.

It's a constitutional thing with the constitution, too.

I'm not surprised you consider doing something principled to be hilarious, for some reason.

[kahless]

It's a constitutional thing with the constitution, too.

I'm not surprised you consider doing something principled to be hilarious, for some reason.

For how long?

[Superfluous Man]

LMAO , now it's a 'Constitutional thing' with you . ''It's the right thing to do''

Notice how that "you" in your words could apply not just to me, but also to Ron Paul, Rand Paul, Justin Amash, and everyone who supports this website's mission.

So then where do you fit in? Are you just here to troll?

[acptulsa]

LMAO , now it's a 'Constitutional thing' with you . ''It's the right thing to do''


Good lord do you deliver.

A violation of the constitution is a violation of the constitution. And the more of those Republicans get away with now, the more Democrats get away with later. That's called 'precedence'.

I thought the danger of Democrats getting away with even more $#@! later was what got your blood pressure up in the first place.

All you want to do is find a way to jump from the frying pan to the fire.

[Krugminator2]

This is an "emergency" declaration. The keyword being "emergency".

He just killed his political future with Republican voters. He may have pleased his open borders donors but not the voters in his home state or nationally if he plans to run for President again. Democrats will never vote for him no matter what he does.

This is actually an important vote where people would be right to criticize Rand had he voted for an emergency declaration. I would have been very disappointed had he voted for this in contrast to the other votes he is criticized for which 99% of the time the people who criticize are retards.

[TheCount]

This is an "emergency" declaration. The keyword being "emergency".

If the President can spend money however he wants, and it takes a two-thirds majority of both houses of Congress to override the President's self-appropriations, then why have Congress at all?

[CCTelander]

If the President can spend money however he wants, and it takes a two-thirds majority of both houses of Congress to override the President's self-appropriations, then why have Congress at all?

It looks better.

[kahless]

If the President can spend money however he wants, and it takes a two-thirds majority of both houses of Congress to override the President's self-appropriations, then why have Congress at all?

I do not believe the President should have that power unless it is an "emergency" in time of war which includes defending our borders from an invasion which is what we have.

[TheCount]

I do not believe the President should have that power unless it is an "emergency" in time of war which includes defending our borders from an invasion which is what we have.

It's not the President's job to be the judge of "time of war" either.

[Swordsmyth]

It's not the President's job to be the judge of "time of war" either.

The President is empowered to repel invasions as the Commander in chief of the military.

[jmdrake]

This is an "emergency" declaration. The keyword being "emergency".

He just killed his political future with Republican voters. He may have pleased his open borders donors but not the voters in his home state or nationally if he plans to run for President again. Democrats will never vote for him no matter what he does.

I would rather him defend the constitution than defend his political aspirations.

And no, this is not a real emergency. The only emergency was the fallout Trump was facing from his base for not fulfilling a hollow campaign promise.

[Brian4Liberty]

Justin Amash agrees...

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...ith-wall-order

[Superfluous Man]

This makes me so proud.

Rand is going to get attacked so hard on so many sides for this. And he's doing it anyway.

[TheTexan]

This makes me so proud.

Rand is going to get attacked so hard on so many sides for this. And he's doing it anyway.

I hope this doesn't mean he doesn't get to play golf with Trump anymore.

[TheCount]