Self described filibuster? What’s that? Here I was thinking it’s a real filibuster. Silly me.
I spent 13 hours running a youth basketball program last week. My feet were sore.
Big Deal.
What is with this guy? So far, unreliable.
Where was the rest of the party is what I want to know...
Did this do any good? No, I don’t think so, not without the rest of the party.
Yesterday they tested the tornado alarms in my area, I didn’t realize they were going to to that and for several minutes as the alarm wailed away over the valley, I waited for the formal codeRed call. Of course, the call never came and I went back to work with the siren being nothing but background noise.
These are dark days indeed.
Paul gave Washington a good hard shake last night and even liberals are questioning why the democrats can’t say they won’t kill Americans.
#StandWithRand is still the top tag on twitter this morning.
Self described filibuster?
"Paul cited, as one of his reasons for stopping, the need to use the bathroom. Traditionally, the rules of the Senate do not permit a "talking" filibuster to be sustained if the Senator conducting the filibuster leaves the chamber. He expressed regret that he had not broken the late Sen. Strom Thurmond's record of over 24 hours, but declared that the effort--in which won support from Senators of both parties--had been worth the effort."
Good, now he can get some rest and vote to confirm Brennan...
nobama: “So he talked for 13 hours. And?? So what?”
What real, concrete difference did Sen Paul’s filibuster make?
Uber RINO Lindsey Ping
"Republican by day, Democrat by night."
Want on or off this ping list?
Just FReepmail me.
h/t to martin_fierro for the graphic
Paul certainly didn’t get much support.
A few republicans helped him out but the majority of the senate, republicans and democrats, seem to be okay with Obama deciding which American citizens he can order killed with drone missles right here on American soil.
After all Obama wouldn’t really go after Bitter Clingers, would he?
The US Constitution means nothing to these people.
I would bet that most senators and congressmen have never even read the US Constitution all the way through.
So now, the Senate agrees 0bama can Hellfire to death any American at will.
And nobody but Cruz stood with Rand to oppose the naked assumption of the power to murder at will.
And the longer he, personally goes, the more the debate among the talking heads will move towards the Drone issue. It stops being perceived as a Republican thing, and becomes another unconstitutional tyrannical act by Holder and backed by the President. It’s very elegant if you think about it. It’s similiar to when Buddhist monks would self-immolate in Viet-Nam. It wasn’t a Viet Cong thing, but a personal protest, a personal sacrificed. And the debate then slowly changes. You get just one talking head on CNN discussing eminent threat and the Sixth Amendment, and no matter how the vote goes, Rand Paul won big, and the President and his cabal lose big.
What was the proposed resolution that he wanted a vote on ? I Intend on calling my more than useless senators (Boxer and Fienstien) and demand they vote on it. I know it was a sense of the Senate about killing Americans with drones. I would like to see the exact wording.
Paul is a stick in the eyes of the DC elite. The disgusting cynical and knowing apologists for tyranny and atrocity, sitting behind easy grins, excusing the worst sort of depravity and corruption with a wink and a smirk, secure in their faith that they are the new elite leaders and are thus exempt from the ‘solutions’ to messy problems represented by those of us who would resist the idea that our lives are not someone else’s property.
Finally, we come to the power-lusters themselves - the so-called ‘progressive’ elites, Bo, Holder, Piglosi, and Feinstein. These individuals are often driven by a profound self-hatred which they direct outwards and project onto humanity in general. Their own self-loathing drives their passion to subjugate and to destroy, thus opening the door to the commission and justification of the most unimaginable of atrocities and crimes against God, man, nature, justice and reason. Another species of power-luster seeks to impose their own pompous sense of moral rectitude upon a resisting and supposedly ignorant public. C. S. Lewis, writing in God in the Dock eloquently warned us about this last type: “Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the ‘good’ of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybody progressive liberals. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”
So what purpose did this filibuster serve? Did it allow McConnell to round up some votes against Brennan?
I’m not against what Cruz did, just wondering what it did in the long haul?
McLame and Linda hated it, so I am for it.