Rand Paul: Filibuster A Possibility On Syria Vote
Source: Washington Post
By Sean Sullivan, Published: September 3 at 7:07 pm
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), one of the most outspoken opponents of military action in Syria, wouldnt rule out the possibility Tuesday of launching a standing filibuster over the issue in the Senate.
I cant imagine that we wont require 60 votes on this, Paul told reporters on an afternoon conference call. Whether theres an actual standing filibuster Ive got to check my shoes and check my ability to hold my water. And we will see. I havent made a decision on that.
Paul attracted widespread attention in March when he launched a marathon filibuster over the Obama administrations use of unmanned aerial drones, winning support from some GOP colleagues and prompting criticism from others.
When it comes to Syria, Paul said he believes the best hope for defeating a resolution to authorize military action will come in the House. He reiterated his view that an attack on Syria would create more turbulence and danger in the region, and may not even disable the Syrian governments ability to launch chemical attacks.
Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/09/03/rand-paul-filibuster-a-possibility-on-syria-vote/
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)That is what I was asking about.
Since when can a 'resolution' be filibustered?
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)A vote on Supreme Ct appointee, trade agreement, military alliance. Hell a vote to recess for vacation can be filibustered, though it would lose 99-1.
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)Cloture (which ends a filibuster) puts a limit on a debate.
Filibusters and Cloture in the Senate:
http://tinyurl.com/plfp6ry
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)... so I got confused by this one
another_liberal
(8,821 posts)Is Democratic support for this illegal, unnecessary and pointless war really going to turn that joker into a hero of the peace movement? Has everyone gone bleating mad?
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)Democrats shouting for more war, and Republicans saying enough. Even DU has gone bonkers. The idiots clamouring for war most certainly weren't in favor of Bush's wars...and I guess what happened to Bush/GOP poll numbers has escaped them.
another_liberal
(8,821 posts)I'm afraid it's going to be very ugly around here in the lead-up to next years mid-term elections.
jmowreader
(50,562 posts)?w=450&h=337
http://gulfnews.com/polopoly_fs/1.1179562!/image/1780292416.jpg_gen/derivatives/box_475/1780292416.jpg
and then there's this...
http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=a/res/260(III)
The question is, how do we punish Assad - and we've got reports from the Germans and the French that say this is his responsibility - for committing acts of genocide without using drones or cruise missiles?
another_liberal
(8,821 posts)Great logic there, jmowreader. We punish Assad for killing his own people, by killing even more of his people. Just how cruel are you?
jmowreader
(50,562 posts)If, and ONLY if, we can determine exactly where this worthless bastard is, we can either (1) send in special operators to remove him, preferably in irons for delivery to The Hague, or (2) put a Tomahawk cruise missile through his bathroom window. I prefer (1). If we can't pinpoint his location, we need to work on it until we can.
What I do NOT want to see, and I know you agree, is the US sending ground troops into Syria to try finding him for seven or eight years, like Bush would have done. And I also don't want to leave the SOB in there to keep on killing his own people.
Imagine a line. On it are two marks: do nothing about Assad, and do too much. Somewhere in the middle is where we need to be - we can't just let the atrocities continue, and we can't blow away half of Syria trying to cure this particular nightmare.
bunnies
(15,859 posts)We've all seen them and shoving them in our faces all the time isnt going to change anyones mind.
jmowreader
(50,562 posts)French intel and German intel have good information that Assad's forces are doing this.
We know Assad holds Sarin and VX.
Can we capture Assad with minimal loss of innocent life? Since Obama managed to turn bin Laden into al-Purina Shark Chow with very minimal excess death, I think so.
bunnies
(15,859 posts)Thats not even our goal. We're just going to shell them with missiles, then you'll have more pics to post.
Bandit
(21,475 posts)Decade? I am sure there are just as many unpleasant pictures to get up in arms over...In fact a child mutilated by US gunships is a bit more disturbing IMO..
brooklynite
(94,699 posts)The Texas Republican said Tuesday on TheBlaze that while hes glad the president listened to calls from him and others to bring the issue to Congress, America shouldnt get involved and risk helping terrorists in the rebel forces.
We certainly dont have a dog in the fight, Cruz said, calling it a civil war in Syria. We should be focused on defending the United States of America. Thats why young men and women sign up to join the military, not to, as you know, serve as Al Qaedas air force.
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/09/ted-cruz-syria-update-96244.html?hp=f2
lobodons
(1,290 posts)NEVER
David__77
(23,474 posts)There is not a single Democratic senator that has spoken out like him in opposing this.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)They handed this to the GOP on a silver platter.
Ohio Joe
(21,761 posts)This is teabagger bullshit.
David__77
(23,474 posts)That would be opposing it. Democrats must support the call to organize a filibuster. They should be prepared to do an actual talking filibuster for days on end.
Ohio Joe
(21,761 posts)teabagger bullshit leads only to fascism.
Hayabusa
(2,135 posts)Ohio Joe
(21,761 posts)I'd rec that if I could
DURHAM D
(32,611 posts)He is a ignorant pipsqueak who will say or do anything to be President and clearly a lot of DUers are buying into his carny act.
David__77
(23,474 posts)It tactically fits into opposing the war plans. The Democrats can and should do better. I'm saying that what is sad is that they are not doing so yet.
bunnies
(15,859 posts)Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)Jump to the 7:30 minute mark on the video below
Article/summary here: http://www.mediaite.com/tv/john-kerry-scolds-rand-paul-on-syria-we-dont-want-to-go-to-war/
David__77
(23,474 posts)Don't want to think about that man spanking anyone. I disagree with your assessment. The American people also reject the hysteria.
pampango
(24,692 posts)They are both convinced that Assad's forces are guilty of using chemical weapons. Fortunately, while neither has yet publicly announced their vote on authorizing the use of force, I am confident they will both vote "No" after the debate in the Senate. If they turn out to be "liberal interventionists" I will be surprised.
IMHO, they want to appear to be undecided in order to have more influence on the drafting of the resolution to make it as limited in scope as possible.
giftedgirl77
(4,713 posts)honest bone in his body. If he does choose to filibuster this vote it is only for publicity & his own personal gain. He doesn't give two shots for those of us who have deployed & have had our spouses deploy repeatedly.
I damn sure don't want don't want to deploy again nor does my husband but I don't want to be a pawn in this assholes game for his own feel good moment.
He can go fuck himself.
Hubert Flottz
(37,726 posts)hire the illegal Mexican refugees to bury them.
The "Rand Thinks" was the hyperbole.
chelsea0011
(10,115 posts)Into the discussion and threatens a fulloshitter because he knows a vote will not go his way.
BlueStater
(7,596 posts)This asswipe will say and do anything to become president. He is NOT on our side.
Morganfleeman
(117 posts)Rand Paul's motivations are as long as they obstruct the eventual outcome, which is a needless strike that threatens a broader conflagration in the Middle East. Democrats should be fighting just as hard, if not harder.
The fact that Eleanor Holmes Norton would say she opposes a strike but would support a resolution because of "loyalty" to the President is an absolute embarrassment. We hire our representatives to think for themselves, not to be led like lemmings off a cliff.
Let's not forget how those "targeted strikes" in Libya have left the country.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/special-report-we-all-thought-libya-had-moved-on--it-has-but-into-lawlessness-and-ruin-8797041.html
arewenotdemo
(2,364 posts)And Libya is a case in point. A feel-good blast for the "humanitarian" interventionists like Power, Rice, Clinton, and Obama.
After the bloody climax, gruesomely welcomed by Clinton ("we came, we saw, he died" the humanitarians immediately lose interest and turn their focus on a new project/target state.
dbackjon
(6,578 posts)Paul causes great harm to the US.
fujiyama
(15,185 posts)to hope that on this front he's successful - and this resolution does not pass.
I'm glad the president has asked congress to authorize the use of force. Congress should likewise use its authority and reject his proposal.
This really isn't about personalities. If not stopped, this country is about to embark on an idiotic and unnecessary path with many yet unforeseen consequences.
jsr
(7,712 posts)I hope he succeeds.
iamthebandfanman
(8,127 posts)at the hearing today!
poor baby!
matt in france
(62 posts)And anti drug war...good allies against the patriot act too....but economically n for abortion they are not my version of cool
matt in france
(62 posts)Such as
1. Anti patriot acts 1 and 2
2 anti war in afghanistan iraq libya syria
3 anti drug war pro cannabis and hemp legalization
4anti domestic spying
5 pro increasing taxes on large corporations
the just dont agree woth most dems about national health care abortion and gay rights
bitchkitty
(7,349 posts)as long as it works.
Erose999
(5,624 posts)babbling brook or gentle rain over a lourspeaker. lol