The bill says that China needs to stop cracking down on Tibet and release Tibetan prisoner arrested during riots.
Why he did this is still under speculation. I tend to think that it is because of his non-interventionist and constitutional beliefs, and that the bill will simply be useless in doing anything, other than to show how arrogant the US government is to thinks that it can do as it pleases to China.
On a similar case concerning the murder of Alexander Litvinenko, the House came up with a similar bill, expressing concern on Russian involvement in the murder. When he was asked to speak about this on the House floor, he states that
- there is no evidence to show Russian government involvement.
- it is arrogant for the US to pass judgement on crimes committed overseas.
- Don't kid yourselves. The real purpose of the bill is to attack the Russian government.
- There is no benefit to the US to pass such provocative resolutions about any other country.
Could this be the same about Tibet.
This is consistent with the rest of his voting record, when it comes to criticizing other countries for their internal policies. However, it did come to the surprise of many people, who immediately began saying that he was ridiculous and insane for doing so and that he voted against Human Rights and freedom. Some go further to say that he is a hypocrite.
This vote, and many others have shown that he is probably the only Congressman to actually vote according to what he believes and thinks. I would like to see his reasons for voting against this bill.
No comments:
Post a Comment