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.

It's a pretty sad day in the U.S. House of Representatives with the only sane figure is Ron Paul (R-TX). Yesterday the House put aside serious governance to take up a puffed up, non-binding resolution, H.RES.560 , offered by Howard Berman, the Los Angeles neo-Con Chairman of the House Foreign Relations Committee (and one of the de facto representatives of Israel's far right Likud Party in Congress). Although one sensible progressive stalwart, Dave Loebsack (D-IA), and one usually knuckleheaded Blue Dog, Brad Ellsworth (D-IN), had the self-respect to vote "present," the superfluous resolution garnered 235 Democrats and 170 Republicans , only Ron Paul voting "nay."Does Ron Paul oppose democracy and freedom? Quite the contrary. Read his statement about the resolution and his vote:This morning the honey was dripping out of Eric Cantor's smirking mouth as he ran to every TV camera in sight to condemn the detestable Supreme Leader and, more to the point, chastise President Obama's stance, which isn't really any different from what the House passed, only without the demagoguery and incitement. Every Iranian reformer I've heard speaking on the radio has asked the U.S. government to not insert itself because it would only make matters more difficult for them. Does this matter to Mike Pence, the bloodthirsty Republicans and dim-witted Democrats? Of course not. John McCain got his first woody since originally being introduced to Sarah Palin at the thought of the streets of Tehran running with blood . Lieberman and Graham were no doubt breaking out a bottle of champagne in gleeful anticipation . The primitive religionist thugs and the military dictators in Iran are cracking skulls and claiming that the protesters are agents of America and the EU. The Iranians, on their own, with our prayers, are completely delegitimizing Supreme Leader Khamenei and the fascist dictatorship there.

Labels: Iran