Important about Rand Paul - He signed the retakecongress pledge and is contractually obligated to follow it!
Submitted by ThePatriot on Fri, 11/20/2009 - 14:47
Everyone calm down already please.
I encourage everyone to goto www.retakecongress.com and read the pledge that clearly addresses foreign policy and the war.
Rand has signed this legally binding contract with retakecongress, do so few people really understand politics and what it takes to win an election? We at retakecongress do and this is exactly why only the candidates that sign the pledge get added to the website.
Regardless what he says or is claim to have said to win the election he must abide by the clauses in our contract.
Stop throwing the baby out with the bath water.
»
"Calm down"
Never heard THAT one before.
Calm down- it's only Sarah Palin that Rand wants to speak for him and, as many will see it, our whole movement. Just because Palin is a total liar and warmonger is no big deal.
Calm down- it's only torture. So what if Gitmo is open? Is that anything to really CARE about? Torturing some brown guys who probably deserve it?
Calm down- it's only Afghanistan. Who cares about THAT stupid country? Bomb them the hell off the planet. Why? Well...why NOT?
Once you are *calm,* you will see that the Neocon Way is the happy way of peace. Go along to get along. Smile.
Yep
Have got to agree with you pseudonym. Hopefully Rand will step back and understand why we support or supported him.
disinformation
IMHO
Are We Not BORN FREE !
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AK3y5z1u14w
Please Donate Today!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khDgz0rODZU&feature=g-upl
interesting
Obama = O.ne B.ig A.ss M.istake A.merica
Obama = O.ne B.ig A.ss M.istake A.merica
I can't imagine this is a
I can't imagine this is a legally-binding contract. There are certain legal elements a contract must fulfill to become enforceable. Here, doesn't seem to be any consideration (something given to Rand Paul or anyone else who signed) sufficient to create a binding contract.
Furthermore, I can't imagine any way our court system would enforce this contract, because it places significant prior restraint on Congress. That means, courts are sure to balk at the idea of upholding a contract that purports to strip Congressmen of their discretion to exercise (and how to exercise) legislative powers.
To understand the prior restraint issue, imagine an incoming judge signed an otherwise legal and binding contract swearing he would only come to a certain outcome for certain types of cases. There's no way a court would deem that enforceable. I can't imagine a court would find differently for Congress. A lawsuit alleging breach of this contract would die during initial procedures (11(b)(6)) and the attorney bringing the claim may very well face sanctions for bringing a frivolous lawsuit.
NOTE: nothing in this post is legal advice nor should it be construed as such. I am not an attorney, I do not represent myself as one, and in no way to I practice law. This is just my layman's take on the issue.
You think what we have
You think what we have posted on the website is our contract with the candidates? All you are doing is creating gossip about things you know nothing about. For the record the attorney that we ratained was an atttorney for Ron Paul.
Please leave the legal advise to the experts in this field.
www.retakecongress.com
www.retakecongress.com
www.revolutionbroadcasting.com
www.RJHarrismoneybomb.com
If you read my post, you
I expressly stated that I did NOT offer legal advice. So don't tell me to "leave the legal advice to the experts." I already did that. I am not a lawyer and I am NOT giving ANY legal advice. Period.
Best of luck, though. I think your intentions are good even though they seem fatally flawed and, worse, if you were successful, the precedent would be terrifying and against the grain of liberty. Think of all the sweetheart contractual deals lobbyists could and WOULD cut behind the scenes. I see your approach as nothing better than the addition of an extra flagstone on the road to hell.