45 votes

Senate Votes To Tighten Sanctions On Iran - Rand Paul Votes Yes 11/30/12


Not one single no vote.

U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 112th Congress - 2nd Session
Amendment Number: S.Amdt. 3232 to S. 3254 (National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013)
Statement of Purpose: To enhance sanctions imposed with respect to Iran.


Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

you speak for me

you speak for me

Ron Paul 2016

You definately speak for me,

Ron Paul hooked me and reeled me in with his foreign policy. I cannot understand what Rand is doing AT ALL. I really wanted him to do better, it is so disappointing.

The world is my country, all mankind are my brethren, and to do good is my religion.
-Thomas Paine

their was a spy in a band of

their was a spy in a band of robbers. the spy ate with them laughed with them sang with them. when it was time, the spy finished them.......... its funny how some people on DP are so confused on rands covert actions to fool the sheeple.

░░░░░███████ ]▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ----------------O

No greater good can come from

No greater good can come from doing evil on the innocent. Rand is failing on principle that will limit him forever. I hope it is not already too late for him. He will be missed.

“Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the government take care of him better take a closer look at the American Indian.” ― Henry Ford.


but these actions have real consequences for innocent people. This is so different than a meaningless endorsement.

The world is my country, all mankind are my brethren, and to do good is my religion.
-Thomas Paine

Not really...

...as the thing would have passed with or without Rand's vote. It passed unanimously! LOL. In other words, voting against it would have been a purely symbolic gesture, wouldn't help any innocent people, they'd get screwed just the same.

"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."

You are right,

it would have passed anyway, but making a symbolic gesture, and voting against this would have been enough to prove whose side he is on. I mean come on, did Ron Paul vote for things because he knew they were going to pass anyway?

The world is my country, all mankind are my brethren, and to do good is my religion.
-Thomas Paine

You ask "did Ron Paul vote for things...

...because he knew they were going to pass anyway?"

I ask: did Ron Paul win the Presidency, or have any real legislative success? IS the country more or less free now than when Ron started?

What do we want from Rand? If want him to continue building the movement as Ron did, then he's screwing up. If we think the movement is build enough, and it's time to use it win real political power, then Rand is acting just as he should. Obviously, this is Rand's goal. He is not trying to be Ron 2.0, the next movement-builder. He's trying to be Rand, the one who translate the energy of the movement into real political success.

"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."

Garan's picture

His game, not mine.

This is why I am not a politician.

If Rand is playing along in areas he can't win, in order to make progress on fundamental issues, then I understand.

However, I'm a bit too principled to consciously perform actions against my beliefs.

So, therein lies my inner support and contention/suspicion of Rand.

I hope he does more good than bad.

What lingers for me is the perspective of foreigners who see our "representatives" overwhelmingly leaning towards war.

This is hard to stomach.

If a "trap" is being set....

by Rand "playin' the game" Paul... didn't you just give it away?

Brother Winston Smith

The r3VOLution is NOT republiCAN.

rands actions are for the

rands actions are for the vast majority of republicans who dislike iran and who do not even come on DP or even own internet.

░░░░░███████ ]▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ----------------O


Just like his Pathway Amnesty is for millions of FOREIGN criminal illegal aliens (many of whom are killing thousands of Americans).

Just like his amendment cutting foreign aid was for campaigning REPUBLICANS to hammer democrats (while covering for republicans).

Just like his ENDORSEMENT of leftist, progressive, ANTI-America, ANTI-Christian, Constitution-SMASHING Romney was for the leftist republican party that doesn't give a damn about Constitution Liberty.

CONGRATULATION! You're starting to wake up!

Brother Winston Smith

The r3VOLution is NOT republiCAN.

as a huge RP supporter,

I have problems with his memorable speech he made about the feinstein amendment yet the amendment invoked loopholes and now set precedent for a failed defensive measure to take the state to trial.

now he votes yes to tighten sanctions and go to war?

there has to be a line in which I draw that says he is full of it, but the problem is he is the only guy in congress I can trust.

so I stand by him still, as a Paulian, and hope that his tactics are used only to pursue proper ends at the next Republican convention. Possibly he knows something that led to this vote in which would keep his 2016 Presidential bid hopeful.

nonetheless, this is why I became disgusted with politics in the first place.

A true flower can not blossom without sunlight and a true man can not live without love.

Seems Rand is more concerned

Seems Rand is more concerned about courting the Tea Party than he is standing up for principles. Can't wait to hear how he tries to justify this one. Let's just see how Dr. Sellout does without the R3volution behind him...

As a Tea Partier...

I must make a correction. The ORIGINAL Tea Party (Ron Paul, End the Fed, border security, anti-TARP, Follow the Constitution) wasn't interventionist. But, the REPUBLICAN-CO-OPTED Tea Party (Palin, Beck, Armey, Baby Boomers, Tea Party Express, Tea Party Patriots, Tea Party Nation, Freedomworks) is.

Brother Winston Smith

The r3VOLution is NOT republiCAN.

Has anyone called his office?

I haven't seen a statement from him yet on it.

What a switch from his previous work against Iran sanction bills.


Dammit Rand...

Why the F*CK would you do something like this? I want to support the guy.. even stick up for him here regularly.


'Peace is a powerful message.' Ron Paul

First Article

on the front page right now is Ron calling sanctions an act of war. Second article (below most viewed) is Rand voting FOR sanctions. What a world we live in.


And a few days ago...

...we had that hit-piece article from Wenzel (some random douche?) attacking Rand. And when was the last time there was anything about Rand on the front page which wasn't negative? The anti-Rand sentiment of Michael N. is blatantly on display. Shame on him, I say.

"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."

I agree, but...

I agree that sanctions are an act of war, but if you lived in Iran what would you rather have: a crippled economy but you still had a chance, or bombs falling on your head? Bad things are happening in Iran because of the sanctions, but nowhere near as bad as they would be if we were bombing them. life is staggering on in that country, certainly hurt by these unjustified sanctions and real awful things are happening, but way less than if they were being bombed.

Sanctions are acts of war and they lead to real bomb-dropping wars, so that's the bad news here. Rand has fallen for the idea that they can be used to postpone or avoid altogether the bomb-dropping war. I think he might be right that it can postpone it (if we weren't sanctioning, these lunatics would be straight up bombing and we all know it, they are bloodthirsty over Iran and the only thing holding them back is that they believe this sanctioning business is fighting against the imaginary threat), but it certainly won't avoid it altogether and will likely lead to it eventually. That's why he's wrong, but remember that he does stand up and hold up bills that try to lead to the all-out bomb dropping wars. Do you remember when he forced the senate to stay until midnight on a Friday night trying to stop foreign aid at least to some degree and also trying to stop a measure that could be construed as authorization for military force against Iran? the foreign aid bill vote was 81 to 10; the Iran war bill was 90 to 1. that 1 was Rand Paul. He is still standing up against the bomb-dropping war, we should not fail to give him credit for that, but we absolutely should criticize him for standing with the economic war (but we should also understand it, what he thinks he's doing; make no mistake, he is one of the senators who is misguided in thinking he's actually helping peace; there are senators who know better who realize they're furthering the cause of war but that is not Rand, he is being a misguided fool on this issue but don't let that demonize him for you completely: principles over personalities, remember to laud people when they do good and criticize when they do evil, or else you're no better than the collectivists)


that was a reply to "It's too late" below... I'm usually more of a lurker than a poster so I think I made a noob mistake here, sorry.

Rand is a sellout, case

Rand is a sellout, case closed.

What does it hurt to trade a

What does it hurt to trade a "yes" vote for something that is going to pass without question for a "yes" vote for other things that have a chance to change for our favor?

Principle? Ok, that's great. I get that, but Ron Paul worked on that for 30 years and got scammed out of getting the nomination and was made to look like a fool by the party at the convention. I love Rand.


Sanctions are at least aggressive actions that may precede war.

They are also being imposed without evidence of any wrongdoing on the part of Iran. Unlike Israel who possesses nuclear capability Iran has signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty and is permitted to develop nuclear energy. Under the Shah the US was supplying them with equipment and feedstock to do just that so they already have the know how to do what they are doing.

All the US and Israel have is the assertion that Iran MAY be developing nuclear weapons. In other words it is a preemptive judgement and sentence being carried out without due process just as happened with Iraq. This is Talmudic law and has been learned from Israel who are very adept at applying it.

This article from an Israeli dissident, who has survived two assassination attempts by the Mossad and is a political prisoner in Bolivia, pinpoints the persuasive forces behind the US attack on Iraq in 2003.


As the article in Yahoo states the AIPAC are once more promoting preemptive war with Iran. It would be preferable if Rand Paul were to speak to these machinations rather than meekly signing on to the rabble rousing but that is unlikely to happen. No doubt he believes he is earning political credits that he can spend in other ways such as the civil rights issues that seem to be closest to his heart. He does not have the same foreign policy smarts as his father and in this he is closer to the typical American who is usually blind to anything happening beyond the borders of the USA.

This is something I have observed about Rand as long as I have paid attention to what he is doing. He is simply less educated about foreign policy than his father. In this as I said he is closer to the average American voter and since he will be 50 on January 7, 2013 it is probably unlikely he will change much. So, I believe he will pursue civil liberties and changing monetary and fiscal policy but his foreign policy will be less informed and principled than his father's. That at least is my assessment.

"Jesus answered them: 'Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin. The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son remains forever. So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.'" (John 8:34-36)

I can only hope he's just doing this to look tough

on foreign policy, to cover his right flank. Disappointing though...

Rand is a joke.

Total neocon sellout.

I don't play, I commission the league.

Oh well

Just stupid every time this happens people are all :B "It's part of the plan" and defend anything he does. What if he does get elected and follows the neocon path?? "Oh wait for his second term, then he can really show em!" will be the excuse. The GOP isn't stupid, but Rand may be... He's diluting our message believing he's going to get somewhere.

Drudge Front Page

Drudge Report's front page has "White House opposed Iran sanctions."

If Rand voted No the measure would still pass, and he'd be smeared by being connected to the Obama administration.


That's the classic Establishment excuse.

Brother Winston Smith

The r3VOLution is NOT republiCAN.

We need someone to HOLD A STANDARD


Christians should not be warmongers! http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance87.html