Rand Paul Wins: Changing of the Guard?

washingtonpost.com ^ | March 7, 2013 | Jennifer Rubin

[BarnacleCenturion]

Earlier today, I noted that Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) were on opposite sides of a generational divide in the GOP that goes beyond ideology. That flared into an open spat as McCain, along with his closest amigo, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), openly slammed Paul, calling him “uninformed.” Graham pronounced that Paul didn’t deserve an answer. McCain hissed: “The country needs more senators who care about liberty, but if Mr. Paul wants to be taken seriously, he needs to do more than pull political stunts that fire up impressionable libertarian kids in their college dorms. He needs to know what he’s talking about.” That peevish retort may have reflected McCain’s sense that he had been badly upstaged. Or maybe he hadn’t followed the debate.

Then, with near-perfect timing, Paul got his response in a two-sentence letter from Attorney General Eric Holder. The first sentence was dishonest: “It has come to my attention you have now asked an additional question: ‘Does the President have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil?’” In fact, that was Paul’s question all along. But Holder then admitted, no, the U.S. government doesn’t have the authority to target U.S. citizens at home who are not involved in hostilities.

Rand Paul got to crow in a series of interviews. He had pried an answer out of a White House habitually averse to treating a co-equal branch with respect. He certainly got more done than Graham and McCain did last night by attending a Georgetown dinner with the president, a White House move no doubt intended to reverse the president’s slide in the polls and make it seem like he was reaching out to Republicans.

[ek_hornbeck]

It's funny how hostile people become when faced with the slightest criticism of their idols, reminds me of the teenagers who get all up in arms when their favorite pop star is ridiculed. I've seen Palin being hyped as the great white hope of conservatism since 2008, and I've seen very little of substance to back this up. I've seen and heard a lot of feel-good, folksy-sounding empty slogans and cliches from her, but very little in the way of substantive ideas or concrete fiscal policy proposals.

She's the GOP's version of "hope" and "change", a telegenic cheerleader, and nothing more. None of your name-calling (I don't know and don't care to know what a PDSer is) is going to change that.

[AmericanExceptionalist]

In a sense, what I did was similar (or at least a cousin to) a mondegreen which is another thing I've learned about recently. A mondegreen (if you've not heard of it) is when one hears "there's a bathroom on the right" as the singer is singing "there's a bad moon on the rise."

I was not previously familiar with the word; so I looked it up.

According to the Merriam-Webster online dictionary, it means "a word or phrase that results from a mishearing of something said or sung <“very close veins” is a mondegreen for “varicose veins”>."

In other words, just about exactly what you said...

[Steely Tom]

Another one is “sixty-five roses” for “cystic fibrosis.”

[Moorings]

Its funny you complain about hostility to criticism about Palin, and then you claim you don't know what PDS means

slightest criticism

You dish out one of the main talking points of libs, the quitter meme. When you are called out for that, you do the usual PDSer tactic, play the victim and claim that you are just providing a bit of honest criticism. "Oh Noooes, those meanie Palinistas are attacking poor ole me for criticizing Palin."

Who is your idol? Karl Rove? It seems like he does not like the people we support either.

[OneWingedShark]

In passive voice, the subject is what is acted upon by the verb. In active voice, the direct object is what receives the action. While some disdain the use of passive voice, especially in formal reports such as theses, passive voice is a good tool when desiring to keep a certain subject as the primary focus of the writing.

Passive voice is awesome; just consider the Second Amendment:
A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Look at how it fares with your zombies-test:
"A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed by zombies."

[TomasUSMC]

Time for a Coup, take over the GOP......... PRONTO (latino pandering).

[chooseascreennamepat]

“Palin needs to come out now and break from McCain.”

Palin is done as a major political power. The media, with the aid of McC, sliced her up, fed her entrails to the pigs and hung her out to dry.

[chooseascreennamepat]

“Palin needs to come out now and break from McCain.”

Palin is done as a major political power. The media, with the aid of McC, sliced her up, fed her entrails to the pigs and hung her out to dry.