Congressman Paul On President Barack Hussein Obama’s Official Stance On Iranian Protests: He Is Demonstrating The Will Of Our Founding Fathers, Which Is Admirable And I Stand With Him On This Issue…
A couple of days ago when the first pro-democracy (or anti-Mullah — whatever the case might be) demonstrations in Iran to protest the apparent, rigged reelection of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad over (so-called) “reformist” presidential candidate, Mir Hossein Mousavi, my column on the topic was congratulatory and thankful for his demonstration of “careful presidential restraint” on the rapidly-unfolding events in this oppressed, sovereign Middle Eastern nation. Not so-surprisingly, not only did some of the members of the “Strict Constitutional Constructionist Religious Right” protest greatly against the president’s reaction in our comments section of the column, federal Congresscritters and Senators spoke out loudly against the “utopic” will of our Founders. You won’t find it written in the Constitution but you’ll find it in their personal writings — our Founding Fathers were separatists who would have rather seen us evolve into a “Sweden” (foreign-policy-wise) rather than the military industrial complex we have become today. Root quietly for Democracy to take root in Iran but keep your mouths shut (publicly, at least) in other words.
Enter Congressman Ron Paul today (H/T to MemeOrandum for the pull) — another of we self-proclaimed “libertarian-ish” types (generally a good bit too far to the Right for MOI, economically speaking). While normally, I’m a bit guarded to say the least when it comes to people with two first names, I must commend the man for (OBVIOUSLY) reading my column on the topic, sleeping on it for a couple of days, praising me for being the genius I am, then coming out with the following statement (in its entirety since I am a co-owner of the site — not worried about copyright violations):
Statement of Congressman Ron Paul United States House of Representatives
Statement Opposing Resolution on Iran
June 19, 2009
I rise in reluctant opposition to H Res 560, which condemns the Iranian government for its recent actions during the unrest in that country. While I never condone violence, much less the violence that governments are only too willing to mete out to their own citizens, I am always very cautious about “condemning” the actions of governments overseas. As an elected member of the United States House of Representatives, I have always questioned our constitutional authority to sit in judgment of the actions of foreign governments of which we are not representatives. I have always hesitated when my colleagues rush to pronounce final judgment on events thousands of miles away about which we know very little. And we know very little beyond limited press reports about what is happening in Iran.
Of course I do not support attempts by foreign governments to suppress the democratic aspirations of their people, but when is the last time we condemned Saudi Arabia or Egypt or the many other countries where unlike in Iran there is no opportunity to exercise any substantial vote on political leadership? It seems our criticism is selective and applied when there are political points to be made. I have admired President Obama’s cautious approach to the situation in Iran and I would have preferred that we in the House had acted similarly.
I adhere to the foreign policy of our Founders, who advised that we not interfere in the internal affairs of countries overseas. I believe that is the best policy for the United States, for our national security and for our prosperity. I urge my colleagues to reject this and all similar meddling resolutions. – HOUSE.GOV
AMEN, Congressman — you hit the nail exactly on the head. And to my fellow Americans who lean to the Right of MOI, yet claim to possess a fetish with the intents, thoughts and minds of our Framers — whatchya gotta say now?
***
Other blogger reactions I respecty deeply: Andrew Sullivan of The Daily Dish (The Atlantic); Wonkette surprisingly turns out to reveal her previously undetectable “Neocon” stripes; The Moderate Voice provides somewhat of an Obama-Iran update….
Loading ...
12:49 am on June 20th, 2009 1
I wish he had run a stronger campaign. I would much rather see Paul in the Oval Office than the former junior senator from IL. Paul may be the only one in elected office in DC that knows what the hell the Constitution is about. And that gets him labled as a nut by Pelosi and her minions.
2:28 am on June 20th, 2009 2
Ron Paul has it correct again. Having Pelosi labeling you as a nut, I believe should be considered a good thing. I’m surprized GTL that you only say “for once” when it comes to Ron Paul. I’m not the expert on Mr.(O.M.G. I mean) CONGRESSMAN Paul or GTL at this point but I would have thought you both would be in agreement of making marijuana legal for example. Ron Paul is, you aren’t?
6:03 am on June 20th, 2009 3
Mike: I don’t smoke pot but my belife is simple: If you can toss a seed into our backyard and it grows — DO WHAT YOU WISH with it
8:43 am on June 20th, 2009 4
[...] The Gun Toting Liberal and The Moderate Voice agree with Ron. Wonkette disagrees with Ron. What’s your take? [...]
9:05 am on June 20th, 2009 5
GTL
OMG, said the name three times in a blog post, and now you’ve summoned the Ronulans.
Honestly, I have to wonder why you weren’t a bigger supporter of Rep. Paul during the previous election cycle. I would think his views were actually a better fit for you than the Democratic Party.
9:30 am on June 20th, 2009 6
Very good. We fully expect Barak Obama to no longer have any statements to be made about any nation around the world no matter what the content. That would be meddling.
No more condemnations of North Korea. Thats meddling.
No more condemnations of China and the Tibet problem. Its none of our concern.
No more statements on the starving in Africa. That is meddling in the affairs of other nations.
No more troops in Afghanistan. That is meddling in the affairs of another nation and the war was not declared by congress hence its a violation of the constitution.
No more bases on foreign soil…that was not the intention of the framers. They were after all rebelling against those same things coming from England.
No more…It is Ron Pauls rallying cry….no more. Zip. Zilch. Nada.
Lets pull the boys home. Close the borders. Turn out the lights and pull the curtains. That was after all the intent of the framers of the constitution…..Just leave us alone and we will leave you alone…right??
9:52 am on June 20th, 2009 7
“Lets pull the boys home. Close the borders. Turn out the lights and pull the curtains. That was after all the intent of the framers of the constitution…..Just leave us alone and we will leave you alone…right??”
Funny, but part of that is the leftists cry too. At least the “pull the boys home” part. They still want to empty our coffers overseas.
I say, since, according to the strident left anyway, all the world hates us, that is exactly what we should do. Pull everyone home, close our embassies, stop all foreign aid for 5 to 10 years.
Let BRIC (http://www.reuters.com/article/ousiv/idUSTRE55F47D20090616) fill in the gaps. It wants to be the new superpower, let it. Earthquake takes out half a country? Why, BRIC can be there with disaster relief and rebuilding. I’m sure Russia and China will give from the heart and not want concessions or repayment.
Famine? Why, BRIC will be there johnny on the spot with free food.
Tsunami almost wipes your country off the map? I’m sure that BRIC will be happy to send some carriers, with their power generating capability, hospital facilities, SAR aircraft and personel, etc. to help.
I don’t agree with everything Paul says, but he has a better grasp than the former junior senator from IL.
9:57 am on June 20th, 2009 8
GTL, I wasn’t assuming you did smoke pot. Er, ah, well maybe I’m not being truthful in that last statement, but. I did assume you agreed with him on that policy.
12:46 pm on June 20th, 2009 9
Junior Senator..hmm…it’s still a grade higher than GWB which was pre-school educated at best.
1:57 pm on June 20th, 2009 10
Hmmm…I do believe that former Pres. Bush had about a 2.75 GPA from Yale. Virtually the same as Kerry, and somewhat higher than Algores 2.2 from Harvard.
The former junior senator from IL left Occidental college in CA “without honors”, so his GPA there was under 1.8. He did better at Columbia and Harvard. But there is no way to find out his overall college GPA since he refuses to let us find out about his past.
I find it amazing that people like Bud can hold two contradictory thesies as both valid. On, Pres. Bush is dumber than two bags of hammers. Yet at the same time he is an evil genius that managed to dupe the entire world, including all the Dems in Congress. Can’t be both.
11:42 pm on June 20th, 2009 11
Transparent government? HAHAHAHAHAH.
He wont even release his birth certificate which would prove he’s not even an American citizen.
PLEASE…dont point me to a laser printout of a birth Certificate from 1963 when they had NO Laser printers.
12:16 am on June 21st, 2009 12
GTL: “our Founding Fathers were separatists who would have rather seen us evolve into a “Sweden” (foreign-policy-wise) rather than the military industrial complex we have become today.”
While no one can truly know what the Founding Fathers had in mind, I believe that they would rather have seen America evolve as a democratic republic rather than see it fall to the tyranny of other nations. If not for the “military-industrial complex”, it is not likely that we would have won WWII and the Cold War. It is more likely that we would have fallen as a nation to Germany or the (now defunct) USSR.
The term military-industrial complex has been used disparagingly over the years, but it has been an instrumental part of the processes that have kept us free. Without the U.S. military-industrial complex, the world today would very likely be a much different place.
We are even more blind when it comes to looking into the future than we are when we try to look into the past. The President, whoever that may be at any given time, has to make judgement calls based on the information he has available to him at the time. Sometimes using the full force of our so-called military-industrial complex is prudent and necessary, at other times, the right thing to do might be to stand by and let events unfold without our interference. The key to being a good leader is understanding which approach to use under which circumstance, but no one has a crystal ball.
Let the events in Iran play out. The Iranians don’t like the U.S. – they don’t even like Obama (sorry libs). So we certainly need to avoid telling the protesters that we are behind them, unless we are willing to back it up with the full strength of our military-industrial complex. Telling them we are behind them without being ready and willing to commit ourselves to the cause will result in the slaughter of thousands of protesters.
And frankly, Obama doesn’t have the guts to back them up.
2:14 pm on June 21st, 2009 13
Joe, GWB lacked common sense and his DADDY gave him a silver spoon. If he was raised in an average Joe family, he might be luck enough to get a job at Denny’s.
2:18 pm on June 21st, 2009 14
lucky enough
3:11 pm on June 21st, 2009 15
Alright Bud! WOO-HOO!!! A liberal voice in a sea of conservative ones. Please stick around to defend my honor, Sir
4:50 pm on June 21st, 2009 16
I wish I could hang with ya GTL…but I gotta deal with recovering Alcoholics that are more rational everyday and that’s enough for me! I feel your pain! However, I’ll check in from time to time…till then have a superb Father’s Day/Summer Solstice to you and everyone else here. ~B~
5:29 pm on June 21st, 2009 17
Bud, you can say the same about St. Algore. He wasn’t exactly born in a shack, nor is he the brightest bulb on the tree. But, he is a sharp operator who knows how to play the marks.
But, you are saying that GWB, dumb as a post and sharp as a sponge was STILL able to put one over, not only on all the Dems in Congress, but all the rest of the world as well. Sounds pretty danged sharp to me.
5:46 pm on June 21st, 2009 18
Al Gore
Another one that would have a hard time flipping burgers at Denny’s. Can’t argue with that one.
7:48 pm on June 21st, 2009 19
Moving forward, one can’t compare the less than stellar academic records of GWB with Obama’s academic records because, well because we can’t compare. With all the problems this country has with leaks, from Joe the Plummer’s records to Valerie Plame, what kind of army does it take to keep an “Iron Curtain” (pun intended) of secrecy around all Obama’s records? I honestly do not care where he was born, but from medical to academic records this guy has accomplished privacy that no one else in this society can possibly do. I’d be happier if all citizens, private and governmental, could keep their records private. But wow, how does this guy do it?
7:01 am on June 22nd, 2009 20
I agree with Ron Paul and the GTL on this one. You really have to split hairs to criticize President O’bomber here. The GOP would do well to avoid trying to score political points on this one. Like me, who can’t hit the broadside of a barn with my 9mm, the GOP should be targeting the healthcare proposals – targets that are much easier to hit.
Steve
10:08 am on June 22nd, 2009 21
The resolution, which expressed support
for Iranian dissidents in the wake of last week’s presidential election, passed 405-1. Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) was the sole “no” vote.
Glad Ron Paul and GTL are not in charge of our foreign policy.
3:12 pm on June 22nd, 2009 22
Doomed,
Just because you have bipartisan support, doesn’t make it right. Think about it. Medicare perscription drug, No child left behind, and the new tobacco legislation. All of them are examples of crappy legislation (unfunded mandates growing government) with strong bipartisan backing. In fact to me, when you have both houses of cong. lockstep on something, it makes me even more suspicious.
Steve
(now discreetly running for cynic-in-chief)
8:24 pm on June 22nd, 2009 23
McCain-Feingold… RealID… The RICO Act… USA Patriot Act… the list of unconstituitional “bipartisan” legislation goes on and on and on….
7:00 pm on June 23rd, 2009 24
Just because you have bipartisan support, doesn’t make it right.
I thought the election of BHO was all about bringing the left and the right together into bipartisan action in which the politics were left behind in order to accomplish something tangible.
here you simply have a statement…NON BINDING upon anyone… A PURE STATEMENT OF SUPPORT for democracy and your comparing it to the Patriot Act? NCLB?
Wow…you guys really didnt want Obama to unite anything did you??? You really didnt. You simply wanted a liberal in charge to ram far leftist policies down our throats.
I understand now….oh wait…no I understood before…this simply is one more confirmation that their is no desire to compromise, be transparent or achieve something in Unity unless its your own agenda being pushed thru congress.
12:27 am on June 25th, 2009 25
lil late on this one, but thought you might enjoy BOBB BAR bite the dog by ALSO praising Obama’s stance (after being careful to first defend the Vietnam campaign.. you can take the boy outta the CIA, but..) (ps, he’s right, we coulda won it..) (fwiw..)
Revolution by cell phone in Iran
by Bob Barr
as published in The Atlanta Journal Constitution
Monday, June 22, 2009 at 8:30 AM
In early 1968, North Vietnam launched a series of military offensives across South Vietnam that became known as the Tet Offensive. Military experts agree that by the end of the offensive in April, the United States and South Vietnamese had beaten the North, which suffered significant casualties. Paradoxically, however, the offensive was widely perceived as a defeat for the U.S., and in fact precipitated a protracted decline in popular support for our involvement in Vietnam. The reason for this anomaly lies in the fact that television was bringing real-time images of the street fighting directly into the living and bed rooms of millions of American viewers.
This was the first example of the manner in which commercial visual communication dramatically influenced the outcome of a military conflict; a nightmare scenario in which military victory was turned to political defeat.
The power of real-time television was apparent a generation later when, at Tiananmen Square in 1989, the world witnessed a single Chinese man, armed with a plastic shopping bag, stop a Red Army tank moving against civilian protestors. Unfortunately, the Chinese government then (and now) understood the power of mass communication, and moved quickly and brutally to quell that nascent popular uprising under cover of night and with no television cameras allowed.
Now, in the streets of Iranian cities from Teheran to Isfahan, citizens by the tens of thousands are staging mass demonstrations unheard of in that country since similar, sustained uprisings toppled the Shah in 1979. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the clerical “supreme leader,” Ayatollah Khamenei — are desperately attempting to tamp down popular support for Mir Hossein Mousavi, who lost the June 12th presidential election to incumbent Ahmadinejad. However, the regime is finding its efforts undermined by cell phone cameras employed by demonstrators to record and send images of the demonstrations — and the government’s sometime harsh methods to stanch them — to friends and media around the world.
If the demonstrators and supporters of Mousavi succeed in having the recent election overturned and even perhaps in having their candidate sworn in as president, it will be the first revolution whose primary weapon was not the tank or even the TV camera, but one of the most empowering of modern inventions — the personal communication device. Despite the tight control over the population that the 30-year-old religious-based regime has maintained in Iran, it may be no match for a population of nearly 70 million, with a high percentage of young people, and which is armed with millions of cell phones, “personal digital assistants,” and laptop computers.
Meanwhile, critics of President Barack Obama are whipsawing the president because he is “not doing enough” to support the anti-government forces. Former presidential candidate John McCain last week blasted Obama for failing to speak out forcefully against the “corrupt, fraud sham of an election” that “deprived the Iranian people of their rights.” Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.) has introduced a resolution.
The reality is that Obama is expressing support for the Iranian students and others demonstrating against the Iranian regime; only in a less fiery tone than critics like McCain (who joked during his campaign that we should “bomb, bomb, bomb Iran”). Obama’s tactics may very well yield more than the red-meat approach — especially long term.
Loud calls for extreme action may please constituents back home, and make for popular sound bites on the Sunday talk shows. However, Obama apparently understands that behind-the-scenes actions (likely being conducted by certain agencies of the U.S. government), coupled with more measured public criticism, may reduce the chances that the Teheran regime will decide to crack down massively on the protestors, as did China 20 years ago, and snuff out a promising move toward reform.