-32 votes

Rand Paul Caves in: Now says he will NOT Fillibuster the WAR Bill!


After Rand Paul earlier suggested that he might fillibuster this insane march to War, Paul now has publicly rejected the idea of any fillibuster strategy.

And with so-called "liberals" like even Barbara Boxer (CA) happily voting in favor of the War, the whole U.S. Senate is now a slam dunk to green light this new epic catastrophy upon the World.

So there is no true political resistance now coming from anyone - except for Congressman Alan Grayson who has zero power.

No one who will step up and fillibuster this madness in an effort to perhaps save thousands...possibly millions of new deaths and new human carnage.

Link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/04/rand-paul-filibuste...

Contact Rand Paul's office and make him realize that if he doesn't stop this.....nobody else will or can!

Make him fillibuster!
It's the only hope.......

Comment viewing options

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

Did I miss something here

The title of this post is very misleading. Compared to what he actually said.

Rand Paul earlier suggested that he might filibuster this insane march to War, Paul now has publicly rejected the idea of any filibuster strategy.

He never said he was going to do it, only that he might do it.

Lets be fair here.

What good is a filibuster anyway?

Sure it draws attention but at some point he'll have to pee just like he did before.

Hate to even comment on this lol

Do you think that Rand Paul would have been able to do the drone filibuster if he would have announced to the media he was going to do it...beforehand?

It was only because of a procedural mistake by the establishment that he was able to start one back then.

You haven't been following the news if you think Sen. Paul isn't doing anything to try to stop this.

Check out http://iroots.org/
"If you’re into political activism, at least for Ron Paul if not for anyone else, I strongly recommend spending some time with iroots.org." - Tom Woods

He is a superb politician - he knows how/when to pick a fight

I mean that in the best way possible.

Ron Paul Would Agree A Filibuster Would Only Be Symbolic

Ron Paul Would Agree A Filibuster Would Only Be Symbolic..

The Senate Foreign Relation Committee already voted 15-3 for war

The lousy bastards that support war have made up their minds about bombing Syria into the "Stone Age"

We can only hope that what Congressman Salmon said yesterday or today that a vote for war in Syria would FAIL by 20 votes in the House of Reprehensibles..

Please don't judge Rand Paul because he may not do a filibuster..

You have to see all the good things he has done so far and all the good he will do in the future..

Pray for Rand - Don't trash him...

"STANDwithRAND"

You are missing the point

The filibuster would not have changed anything in the Senate. The fact is they are a rubber stamp for Obama as long as they hold the majority. I'm glad the vote went forward because it is obvious now who is FOR and who is AGAINST this war and the Dems are for it. BIG TIME. They will pay a price from their constituency for that. Rand is just getting out of the way because the real fight is in The House. My question is what will Obama do if The House votes it down? If Congress says NO loud and clear than the answer is no. Obama has NO constitutional authority to move forward. If he does so then there are serious grounds for impeachment. International laws will be broken and he will be isolated. The simple fact of the matter is Obama is in a world of hurt here and he knows it. That is why he came to Congress in the first place and why he is NOW blaming Congress (and the world) for setting the red line. He is already doing damage control. If he goes ahead with this he could technically be tried for war crimes.

In the other thread about a

In the other thread about a possible filibuster I laid out the argument against filibuster. This is not the time to do it.

Rand has been advocating for the Congress to assert its authority over acts of war. Now, Congress is going to vote on it. If he stands in the way of that, he will be seen as impeding the thing he has been advocating for, regardless of how the vote actually goes.

The rhetoric is a "small engagement". It doesn't matter if that will actually hold true. That's the fight he is up against. He's trying to build political capital. You don't go "all in" when you don't have a slam dunk in the cards.

The OP is completely out of line. Rand is not the only Senator. I understand he is held to a different (higher) standard but he's only one man. How about calling and complaining to ALL of your representatives instead of tying up the office of the one man who is actually fighting for peace? You come off as a shill for the MIC.

The posted title is taken out

The posted title is taken out of context, and completely untrue.

Read beyond the headlines. Rand Paul is in the middle of one of his biggest political challenges yet, and people want to trash him before the vote has even happened?

That is not fair, nor called for.

Hold your freaking britches and stop acting like a freaking globalist scum loving coward.

Never be afraid to ask simple questions.

If you are going to trash a

If you are going to trash a man over something, at least learn how to spell it! Morons!

"In reality, the Constitution itself is incapable of achieving what we would like in limiting government power, no matter how well written."

~ Ron Paul, End the Fed

You guys thrashing Rand are

You guys thrashing Rand are all just shills or retards and for Christ's sake if you are going to trash the guy about filibustering at least know how to spell the word. What will a filibuster accomplish other than to delay the inevitable for 12 or 13 hours just like Rand said? Here is the one guy bringing the most attention to everything that is wrong with the political theater we are witnessing where the executive branch will simply ignore the law and will of the people and just do what it wants anyway? Yet you all want to trash him because he doesn't meet your idiotic ideals of perfection or of what a deity should be.

Now back off to to talk about 9/11 truth and chemtrails giving the other side ammunition to attack us all as crazy. You people are ridiculous.

"In reality, the Constitution itself is incapable of achieving what we would like in limiting government power, no matter how well written."

~ Ron Paul, End the Fed

Cave in or acting on orders.

I am watching Mr . Paul with a jaundiced eye. I've been watching these birds too long to trust anyone of them. Rand visited Israel earlier in the year and was vetted by Netanyahu. Binny probably sent a message to the Senate - pass the bill or I'll sic AIPAC on any anti-semite who has the gall to vote against Israel's interests in the Middle East.

It only takes one to KEEP AMERICANS FREE. Know your duties & rights as a juror. Stop the unconstitutional conviction of innocents in federal custody. The Fully Informed Jury CALL 1-800-TEL-JURY www.fija.org IMMEDIATELY if not sooner. It's that important.

yes conscript him!!

like a statist fascist!!!!

You should trash Ron Paul too! He never filibustered!!

https://twitter.com/#!/Agonzo1

we not only have to fight them

we have to weed out all the trolls.

Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must. like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it.-Thomas Paine

The R3volution requires action, not observation!!!!

crappy title for a post. a

crappy title for a post. a filibuster here would have accomplished absolutely nothing as far as stopping the war. the american people are already educated enough to not support it. congress will do it anyway. the end.

All paper money eventually returns to its real intrinsic value, zero. - Voltaire

WHY a Fillibuster is GOOD!!


All you guys just don't get it.

----

I. While a Fillibuster may not ultimately change any votes, it does then force 60 Senate votes to break the Fillibuster (instead of just a 51 vote rubber stamp).

So that right there is progress, and creates a possibility of a more difficult passage, and even a deadlock scenario.

II. Any stall tactic is a good thing right now. It gives the U. N. more time to solidify its own opposition to the Military strikes, It gives Russia more time to publicize the fact that the Chemical Weapons were hand-made (Hello McFly??) , and not of Military Grade (as alleged).

This extra time will isolate the United States further within the International community. It will make France more reluctant to participate. It will cause more deliberations and confusion within the Obama Administration. It will make John McCain piss his pants. All of this works to make it much harder for the quick triggering of Bombs landing.

A mutiny within some ranks may even yet still be possible.

----

So the point is it is our only chance here, and we must then take it.

There are no guarantees, but you fight against illegal War until it becomes impossible to do so --- not just give up beforehand.




we get everything

that's why we are here Libertybaby. Please don't suggest we don't know anything.

Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must. like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it.-Thomas Paine

The R3volution requires action, not observation!!!!

Then push on Rand for the Fillibuster.....

Make Congress really sweat it out....

Ron Paul was far greater than

Ron Paul was far greater than Rand seems to be, but Rand Paul seems to be the best that we have in Washington at this time by a longshot. So what if he doesn't filibuster? I don't recall Ron Paul filibustering the big issues. Better to hold Rand Paul accountable on the issues than on tactics.

In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock.
-- Thomas Jefferson

Rand Paul is doing a great

Rand Paul is doing a great job any way you slice it.

I don't understand Rand. I

I don't understand Rand. I don't know if it's just his style or his personality. Ron Paul seemed more precise and clear. Rand just seems all over the place, and I don't know exactly where he stands.

I'll help

"... I don't know exactly where he stands."

He stands a chance of getting nominated and, thus, of getting elected and, thus, of changing the fate of the US.

Rand is being wise to save a filibuster for something where he can both decrease momentum toward tyranny and increase momentum toward making himself a viable alternative in 2016. Now, if he votes FOR more war I will be disappointed in him, but that isn't likely to happen.

Bill of Rights /Amendment X: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Do you need a politician or judge to "interpret" those 28

Exactly

And in this case everybody is acutely aware of what's going on. They had special congressional sessions just for this, a filibuster would be stupid, pure political theater.

You guys don't understand a fillibuster.

Like Rand said, all it can do is prevent something for about a day, or as long as the person doing it can last without out passing out, or going to the bathroom. A filibuster is a political move which might bring to light something the nation was unaware of, but it cannot stop legislation that is going to pass. Rand filibustering the confirmation of a cabinet member brought drone to the national debate, but it didn't prevent the appointment. Rand filibustering the vote on Syria will do nothing. NOTHING. The vote will still happen the day after he is done filibustering, or that night. The people are already talking about Syria so it isn't like he is helping promote this as a public debate. Filibustering here doesn't stop the attack. It just makes Rand look like he's grandstanding.

Free market capitalism isn't right for America because it works better. It's right because it's free (and it works better).

Exactly

And in this case everybody is acutely aware of what's going on. They had special congressional sessions just for this, a filibuster would be stupid, pure political theater.

I dont like Rand, but not for

I dont like Rand, but not for this.

downvoted

maybe some sheep dont get it....

I dont like him for other reasons....filibustering this thing wont make a difference, and he knows it.

Saying You Might

do something and then not, is not caving. Rand has spoken very well on this topic and I am 100% positive he will vote against war. he probably realizes a filibuster is useless. His filibuster about the drones was effective because the American people were asleep on the issue and his filibuster forced everyone to pay attention. The American people are already awake and in agreement on the war with Syria. 90% oppose it

Are you really surprised?

Waffles on closing Gitmo, supports domestic drones "on certain conditions," "enthusiastically supports" Mitt Romney, while his thugs are brutalizing Ron Paul delegate wannabes and usually votes with the majority to support Israel.

Never, ever, ever vote for anybody who supports Israel.

Talking filibusters like the

Talking filibusters like the "drones" one are not best suited to holding up war. Rand is smart, he knows this.

Nonsense

A filibuster can not stop the war and that's what he said. It could delay it for 13 hours but then what. This im just an attempt by the commies at huffpo to bring down Rand and prop up Alan Grayson. The liberals never miss an opportunity to disparage a conservative.

This article says he will filibuster

in the sense of requiring 60 votes for cloture. He made the statement below after the committee passed the AUMF.

“I don’t have intentions of holding it up, but I do have intentions of holding it to the highest vote threshold that we can, and that would be a 60-vote threshold,” Paul said.

http://blogs.rollcall.com/wgdb/saturday-session-in-play-as-s...