Sunday, January 31, 2010

Screw Haiti!

Lest we thought that the asshatery of Pat Robertson or the moonbattery of Danny Glover couldn't be outdone, a certain Congressman from Texas has given them a run for their money.

Ten days ago, the House of Representatives voted on H. Res. 1021: "Expressing condolences to and solidarity with the people of Haiti in the aftermath of the devastating earthquake of January 12, 2010."

As one would expect, the resolution was passed, almost unanimously. The vote was 411 for, one against. The lone dissenter was Ron Paul.

To those who still think Ron Paul should be President, this vote exemplifies why he wasn't, isn't, won't, and shouldn't be taken seriously by clear thinking people.


  1. He's utterly consistent. Paul doesn't believe that the U.S. should be involved in anything like the operations we're currently undertaking in Haiti, no matter how noble or selfless the intent. He's cast votes of this sort before.

  2. I would disagree with you on this one Stover. As Mr. D points out, Paul is consistent with his limited government philosophy. I suspect he would say his constituents didn't send him to Washington to pass resolutions about nice sentiments, but to conduct the people's actual business as outlined in the Constitution. So often these sentiments are just meaningless preening.

  3. and since so many voters like meaningless preaning, is why the vote was 411-1.
    maybe you play that game, as well?

    and we wonder why congress is so f'd up.

    but, ron paul would be the first of his fellow statesmen to board an aircraft to haiti and treat the sick.
    hes done this sort of thing.
    maybe his age is what prevents him from making the rigorous treks he used to.

  4. Mr. D / WBP - I don't disagree with anything you've said, but I think my point is being lost.

    Yes, he's been consistent with this sort of vote. That, of course doesn't make him right.

    And yes, the bill under consideration may have been meaningless preening, but once it's on the floor and being voted on anyway, why say 'no' to expressing condolences for and solidarity with Haiti in this case?

    What stands our country above others is our capacity to open our hearts / wallets when another part of the world is in crisis (real crisis, not crap like global warming).

    The bill may have been meaningless as a standalone gesture, but it sends the right message and sets the right example. By contrast, the message Dr. Paul sent is, as I said, "Screw Haiti."

  5. Dan, I understand that and I don't disagree with you, either. That's just how Ron Paul rolls. And I would say that he's a much better Congresscritter than, say, Betty McCollum.