Senator Paul Blocks $40B for Ukraine: 'We Cannot Save Ukraine by Dooming the U.S. Economy'

a reply to: putnam6

40B here 40B there in the end we are all screwed.

Who likes squirrel brains for dinner?

originally posted by: putnam6

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: putnam6

It's theatre.

Hubris.

PAul knows it will pass next week but now the Sunday talk shows have a topic other than inflation, open borders, gas prices, or the feckless administration.

Of course, it will pass, at least we atleast got somebody saying it's complete and utter BS till it does.

As far as Paul's motivations are you saying Paul's pandering to his base?

Because he is certainly entrenched there and is no need for the prop up.

Most likely he isn't likely to be running for President so who is the theater for?

The theatre is for all the other politicians to make their cases FOR and AGAINST the bill.

If anything, he's allowing the republicans who will vote FOR it to defend themselves.

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: putnam6

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: putnam6

It's theatre.

Hubris.

PAul knows it will pass next week but now the Sunday talk shows have a topic other than inflation, open borders, gas prices, or the feckless administration.

Of course, it will pass, at least we atleast got somebody saying it's complete and utter BS till it does.

As far as Paul's motivations are you saying Paul's pandering to his base?

Because he is certainly entrenched there and is no need for the prop up.

Most likely he isn't likely to be running for President so who is the theater for?

The theatre is for all the other politicians to make their cases FOR and AGAINST the bill.

If anything, he's allowing the republicans who will vote FOR it to defend themselves.

Well, I got no problem with that, there are plenty of people on both sides of the aisle that should explain to their constituents why sending 40 billion to Ukraine supersedes sending 40 billion elsewhere, America included.

Hopefully, Paul's delay will give the Senators time to actually READ the bill before voting on it again.

a reply to: Ksihkehe

He's quite handy to have around, like an inverse water finding stick.

It's good that at least one person in Congress has common.

a reply to: putnam6

Rock on PAUL.

nuff said.

Come November, its critical that other Republicans with the steadfastness and resoluteness of Rand Paul be voted into the House and the Senate.

He appears to be the only Republican who has the guts/bawls/courage to vote "NO" when most Republicans would like to, but can't find it in themselves (for whatever reasons), to do so.

originally posted by: IAMTAT
Hopefully, Paul's delay will give the Senators time to actually READ the bill before voting on it again.

So, youre of the opinion that senators can read?

Methinks you give them far too much credit.

Paul wants to amend the $40-billion bill to allow for a special inspector general to oversee how the money is spent, similar to the special inspector general who monitored U.S. spending on Afghanistan.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) urged Sen. Paul not to "stand in the way" with his "reckless demand" for changes that are not supported by Democrats.

OVERSIGHT = A reckless demand to Schumer and Democrats.

Now I understand why I'm not a democrat.

originally posted by: dandandat2

Paul wants to amend the $40-billion bill to allow for a special inspector general to oversee how the money is spent, similar to the special inspector general who monitored U.S. spending on Afghanistan.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) urged Sen. Paul not to "stand in the way" with his "reckless demand" for changes that are not supported by Democrats.

OVERSIGHT = A reckless demand to Schumer and Democrats.

Now I understand why I'm not a democrat.

Yea what is wrong with having oversight and seeing where the money goes? you know like a compromise

a reply to: putnam6

Congress auditing itself doesnt sound like a good idea....to say the least.

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: putnam6

Congress auditing itself doesnt sound like a good idea....to say the least.

Better than sending a blank check and getting no invoices

a reply to: putnam6

I think theres a massive argument behind each.

Especially at this juncture in time.

originally posted by: putnam6

originally posted by: dandandat2

Paul wants to amend the $40-billion bill to allow for a special inspector general to oversee how the money is spent, similar to the special inspector general who monitored U.S. spending on Afghanistan.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) urged Sen. Paul not to "stand in the way" with his "reckless demand" for changes that are not supported by Democrats.

OVERSIGHT = A reckless demand to Schumer and Democrats.

Now I understand why I'm not a democrat.

Yea what is wrong with having oversight and seeing where the money goes? you know like a compromise

What's wrong is that it helps to prevent grift and Democrats need as big a war chest as they can get this November.

a reply to: putnam6

Rand Paul is right. There is a massive baby formula shortage and yet these politicians that had been pushing a hot war with Russia since the 2000s.

Have money for others and conflict?

there is another elephant in the room that no one be here (unless i missed it to which im sorry ) or in the main stream press has mentioned.

that is this "bill" (as i understand it) is MORE than just "aid to ukraine"

in usual WASHINGTON POLITICS (all are guilty of this but mostly democrats over last decade or so) is putting ALOT OF OTHER SPENDING IN IT, other NON RELATED PROGRAMS and laws/policies.

then when (as a few politicians mostly republicans) its held up because of it we get "but your denying help to those hurt by XX.

we saw ALOT OF THIS in the covid "relieve" (pardon me while i take a moment to stop laughing at the absurdity of that label) and now its "ukraine"

as i have stated before AND WILL CONTINUE TO DO SO is MAKE IT A CLEAN BILL

you want aid to ukraine.. then make it an ONLY AID TO UKRAINE bill

then you can debate it ONLY ON ITS MERITS.. be for or against.

scrounger

BTW is to too early to point out under trump russia didnt do this (outside of Crimea but thats another issue) ?

May 13, 2022 UPDATE

U.S. President Joe Biden is annoying the world, and bringing the U.S. closer to a direct strike on our interests somewhere in the world, by Putin-Russia.

Biden is Dangerous as hell!: foreignpolicy.com...

originally posted by: MiddleInsite
Rand had a chance to vote on money for bridges and roads.

He said NO.

So what exactly do you guys want except of course to bitch.

He said “no” to pork, not to repairing infrastructure.

Hiding garbage that can’t stand on its own merit in a bill is a big problem.