Dr. Ron Paul's Liberty Caucus

I had the honor to address today members of the Liberty Caucus, a group of Congressmen who support political and economic freedom. The event took place in the office of one of my political heroes, Congressman (and Dr.) Ron Paul, the only libertarian Member of Congress. The meeting was private but to give you some idea of the sentiments I encountered you could check out this latestreport about what Dr. Paul, and another member of the caucus, Congressman Walter Jones of North Carolina (who attended the event today) were doing yesterday:
In the House, Republican Reps. Walter Jones of North Carolina, Ron Paul of Texas and Wayne Gilchrest of Maryland announced their support for a Democratic resolution that would force an immediate, 17-hour-long House debate on the war aimed at requiring a plan to get troops out.
"There are those of us in both parties who want to meet our constitutional responsibility, and that is to discuss and debate the present and the future of our commitment in Iraq," Jones said.
"Nobody, including us, is for pulling out. We're asking for a transition plan for when the Iraqis can take over the responsibility. We're not hearing that plan. We're hearing that, well, maybe the next president can deal with it," Jones said, referring to a Bush comment last month. "That's not satisfactory."
Said Gilchrest: "The public is clearly concerned, and there's palpable apprehension every day about the war in Iraq. And we have to dig deeper than just saying we supported the troops."
House Republican leaders have blocked consideration of the resolution, introduced by Rep. Neil Abercrombie, D-Hawaii. He said he had about 80 signatures on a petition to force a House debate, but was still far short of the 218 needed.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Pundits who screw-up: No big deal...

Image
Matt Barganier desconstructs Andrew Sullivan's mea sorta culpa on Iraq in Time magazine (Sullivan seen above in a thoughtful pose on Bill Maher's "Real Time"). There have been many of those in recent weeks (including by WFB and Fukuyama ). In an commentary published last year, Oops! I helped start a War which was about one of the earlier apologizing-war-aplogists, I pointed out to the contrast between the way the losers who operate in the market (including financial analysts) are punished and the reality in which the losers in the political game (including foreign policy analysts) rarely get punished: Imagine: for a few years you were investing the money you had saved for your daughter's college education in one of those moderately conservative plans that provided some increase in the value of the investment without exposing it to major risks. But then your financial planner – let's call him Ken P. – got in touch with you and came up with a really great ide
Read more

When will Israel attack Iran?

Image
I'm not an "Intelligence analyst" and I don't play one on television. But I urge you to study the following items: 1. Seymour Hersh new piece in The New Yorker, "The Next Act: Is a damaged Administration less likely to attack Iran, or more?" 2. Tony Karon's "Israel's Domestic Political Games Raises the Danger of a U.S.-Iran War." 3. Aluf Benn's "Olmert's Drums of War" in Haaretz . 4. Bush:I would understand if Israel chose to attack Iran. 5. Michael Oren's op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal on November 16 which is only accessible to subscribers. So here are a few interesting quotes: Much like 1967, Israel faces a Middle Eastern leader who has repeatedly sworn to wipe it off the map, and to that end is assiduously trying to acquire nuclear weapons. Like Nasser, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad can cripple Israel economically by keeping it in a state of alert, driving away foreign investment and tourism. In the absence of interna
Read more