Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
Rand Paul promises to filibuster PIPA (dailycaller.com)
262 points by dataminer on Jan 19, 2012 | hide | past | web | favorite | 23 comments



Meanwhile, Ron Paul is battling the indefinite detention provisions of the NDAA in the House.

http://www.youtube.com/watchfeature=player_embedded&v=tg...


That link was giving me an error. This one works:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tg69QM1yXQQ


Sen. Ron Wyden also promised to filibuster the bill back in November: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/11/wyden-pipa-filibust...

Two Senators willing to filibuster plus the amount that backed out after yesterday's protests will make it very tough to get this bill to a vote.


Two Senators willing to filibuster plus the amount that backed out after yesterday's protests will make it very tough to get this bill to a vote.

This is absolutely not true. 41 votes are needed to prevent closure. According to Rep Lofgren the headcount for no votes on closure are down in the singe digits : http://www.reddit.com/r/SOPA/comments/onk34/urgent_message/

Once closure happens the bill heads into markup behind closed doors where the sausage making starts.

These bills are still very much on track. People need to be on the phones to their senators urging a no vote on closure so that the debate can happen in public with input from both sides.



They don't want their methods to be public.


I don't think two or three senators in itself makes a difference. If 60 senators vote for cloture, then a time limit is put on debate and a vote is forced.

That's not to say that the PIPA group will have 60 votes...just saying that Rand's attempt would've meant little before the PIPA coalition collapsed


And Rand has promised this before. But we need 41 to actually prevent a vote, since the Senate has already filed to override the filibuster.


I changed my registration to vote for Paul. I have yet to be disappointed with my decision.


Just to help clarify, this article about Rand Paul, the son of Presidential Candidate (and House Member) Ron Paul.

If you changed your registration, you presumably did it so you could vote in a Primary; That's where Ron is running for president. Rand won the general election in Kentucky.

If you did, in fact mean, that you live in Kentucky, and changed your registration to Republican, to vote for Rand in the Kentucky Republican Senate Primary, back in May 2010, I apologize; People tend to get confused between the Father/Son Duo sometimes.


I did, in fact, change my registration to vote in the KY Senate primary. But you are not off in pointing out the confusion often seen in discussing Rand and Ron.


Cool. I figured that was possible, but I've seen a number of people get confused, so I wanted to make sure.

It's also easy to mis-read while skimming. ;)


I thought Ron was also against SOPA/PIPA ...


Ron is also against SOPA, which is the house bill, which he is able to vote on.

Rand is able to filibuster PIPA, the senate bill, where he is a member.


"Just because someone agrees with you on one thing, it doesn't mean you're on the same side"

http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2077


Just donated $ to him.


The first time i saw him on TV, when he won his election, i thought: "The only tea party member who makes a sane/sincere impression".

Now i read here he is the son of Ron Paul...

[edit] I meant that in a positive way. I hope there are more of such republicans, who don't have to be part of the Paul family.


Is it just me or is filibustering similar to 5 year old's debate strategy? It seems like the adult equivalent of stomping your feet and throwing a temper tantrum, hoping that the other side cracks before you do.


It forces an extra 10% votes to pass something.


He's still a fink racist enabler.


And politicians always follow through on their promises


Ron and Rand Paul are two of the very few politicians who consistently vote the same way and keep their word. This makes them amazing if you love them, terrible if you disagree. I for one agree, so it makes me happy that they appear to be practically incorruptible by Washington.


Clearly you're unfamiliar with the Paul family.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: