11 votes

Can we PLEASE have an Audit the Fed gathering at The Senate

Just a quick post. Was wondering if anyone is going to show up to Washington if the Majority of the Senate still opposes any of the Audit the Fed bills. I know I will be making a trip over there if the current situation continues. Hopefully our work is still cut out for us and we can change some people's way of thinking beforehand. But if the time comes anyone else going to express your freedom of speech?




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Give Me Enough Advance Notice. . .

. . .and I'll be there with you.

It's way past time to stand.

Too, if we can do this before Tampa - and have a respectable amount of people show up - that would be a boon to our cause.

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. ~Thomas Jefferson

“It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie...the greatest enemy of the State.” ~Joseph Goebbels

Think about it this way.

You KNOW Audit the Fed is popular.

And you KNOW Washington doesn't want to do it.

So what do you do? How about having virtually every candidate running this year in both houses endorse it and all those not running (with nothing to lose) will oppose it?

That would be 100% of the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES (***** Please note. I must be very specific here as our member fireant is easily confused*******) (I am talking theoretically here) and 1/3 of the Senate. And the end result would be nonpassage of the bill altogether - because it would die in the Senate - pretty much as it is doing.

(Better now fireant?)

Audit the Fed made it through Congress for two reasons.

#1.) EVERY Congressman is up for reelection (not just 1/3 as in the Senate).

#2.) Congress knew damn well that the bill would never make it through the Senate.

fireant's picture

jetguy, I'm not trying to embarrass you, but please learn

the correct application of terms. Congress is the two legislative bodies, composed of the House of Representatives and the Senate. No need to give our detractors ammo for derision.

Undo what Wilson did

While technically you are correct, certainly you are aware that

the two houses are refered to as "Congress" and its members are called "Congressmen" and the "Senate" and its members are called "Senators".

Is YOUR Congressman also your Senator?

Do you address you Senator as "Congressman ________"?

I am guessing that you do not.

So please do not be stupid here at the Daily Paul. It makes us all look foolish.

I am not trying to embarrass you either but frankly your admonition is idiotic.

fireant's picture

So how did Audit the Fed make it through Congress???

As you say, the two houses are Congress, so you are saying it passed both houses? Sorry dood, you are the one looking foolish here. And I address my House Rep as "Representative".

Undo what Wilson did

Lets look at my sentences:

"EVERY Congressman is up for reelection (not just 1/3 as in the Senate)."

The fact that I differenciated, in the same sentence, between the Senate and the Congress, doesn't seem clear enough to you that a distinction is being drawn? Were you confused by the sentences to think that I was saying that ALL the mombers in both Houses are up for election but only 1/3 of those in the Senate, meaning that 2/3 of the Senate both is and isn't up for election??

And lets look at the other sentence.

"Congress knew damn well that the bill would never make it through the Senate."

In this case it wouldn't matter whther Congress refered to a single house or both since the sentence is true in either case. All of those in the House as well as those in the Senate were aware that the bill would never make it through the Senate.

fireant's picture

I was looking at your title; you stated it cleared Congress

.

Undo what Wilson did

So if Congressman Paul and Senator Paul were in the same room

and you said out loud "Congressman Paul?" would you expect both to answer you?

Would you expect that Senator Paul would be dumbfounded and confused as to whom you were speaking to?

I guess you also expect Congressman Ron Paul to say "Well Golly. which one of us do you mean? We are so-o-o-o-o-o-o confused."

fireant's picture

That begs the question.

The fact most people call their rep "Congressman" is not the issue. You stated in your headline the audit the fed bill had passed Congress. It has not passed Congress; it passed the House. I tried to politely point out the error, and you respond by implying I'm stupid and idiotic. Now you're trying to change the topic. Audit the Fed has not passed Congress.

Undo what Wilson did

And didn't I say in another headline that you were technically

correct?

My apology that the differentiation was not made perfectly and crystal clear.

fireant's picture

I don't see it as a "technicallity".

It is a fundamental reflection of one's knowledge of the structure of constitutional government. There are hundreds of people lurking here, and they absorb what we say. If we don't get the basics right, they have good reason to believe our critics who say we are loony.

Undo what Wilson did

Thats where you are 100% wrong.

I have been aware of the fact that there are TWO houses of Congress since my fourth grade civics classes. I am CERTAINLY not the first to use the word "Congress" to refer to the House of Representatives. It is done all the time.

If people think we are looney it may be because we make a SUCH a big deal of small things like this, where the meaning of the post was extremely clear with a simple reading, even if the headline was not technically correct.

Looney people are often known for being excessively obsessed with detail.

fireant's picture

I'm not the one making a big deal of it. It isn't. I merely

pointed out a simple error and you flamed it up by calling me stupid and idiotic, which is rather rude, so buzz off.

Undo what Wilson did

Every nuance of the error has been detailed. A simple

reading of the post made clear what I was saying even if the headline didn't. But that wasn't enough. Even an apology wasn't enough. Several exchanges later you told me that it reflected my lack of knowledge about constitutional government.

I think this has been obsessed and beaten to death.

I Knew What You Meant, Jetguy. . .

. . .and I agree with you.

Total morons don't usually hang out on the Daily Paul - although I've seen some that were close. . .the vast majority being Gary Johnson supporters.

Anyway, my point was - I knew exactly what you meant. The word "Congress" is used interchangeably. I hardly ever see it written that the "House of Representatives" voted on. . .blah, blah, blah. When the word "Congress" is used - and we all know what it means.

Hopefully the beating of the dead horse is over.

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. ~Thomas Jefferson

“It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie...the greatest enemy of the State.” ~Joseph Goebbels