Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You think he hoped no one noticed, even while he looked into the camera eh ? Cheap shot, but what else do you have ? Nothing but dribble it apears..Oh, I take that back. This guy's in charge. The man who gets so nervous having to make a speech to a camera that he grabs and gulps a water bottle and hopes you don't notice.
Given the IQ of your average Republican, he was probably right.
Oh, I take that back. This guy's in charge. The man who gets so nervous having to make a speech to a camera that he grabs and gulps a water bottle and hopes you don't notice.
Given the IQ of your average Republican, he was probably right.
More: Rand Pauls Drone Filibuster Sparks GOP Civil War | TPMDCBy SAHIL KAPUR
Sen. Rand Pauls (R-KY) epic 13-hour filibuster of John Brennan for CIA director finally came to an amicable resolution Thursday, but not before sparking a battle within the Republican Party hierarchy the latest in a series of internal struggles the party has faced since the election.
On Pauls side is the right-wing apparatus and their darlings in Congress notably Sens. Mike Lee (R-UT) and Ted Cruz (R-TX), who joined the filibuster. They were delighted by Pauls highly public confrontation with the White House and cheered him on until the very end.
One the other side are the GOP neoconservatives, led by Sens. John McCain (R-AZ) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who are Washingtons chief guardians of broad executive power when it comes to dealing with the countrys enemies.
They were furious with Pauls attacks on President Obamas drone policy.
To somehow allege or infer that the President of the United States is going to kill somebody like Jane Fonda, or somebody who disagrees with the policies, is a stretch of imagination which is, frankly, ridiculous, McCain said Thursday morning on the Senate floor.
He read from a scathing Wall Street Journal editorial declaring that 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 hes talking about.
That angered the wealthy conservative activist group FreedomWorks, which called McCains remarks rude and out of line, and slammed him for schmoozing with President Obama over dinner while Paul was mounting his courageous filibuster.
Oh, I take that back. This guy's in charge. The man who gets so nervous having to make a speech to a camera that he grabs and gulps a water bottle and hopes you don't notice.
Given the IQ of your average Republican, he was probably right.
Back to the point of this thread though. I see John McCain and Lindsey Graham attacking Rand. I saw John Yoo disagreeing with Rand. Does three people equal a civil war, or am I missing some others?
Rubio did himself no favors last evening; quoting Jay-Z and The Godfather during his portion of the filibuster....he's been relegated to lightweight status.
intentionally misframed
in other words, a dishonest question intended to derive a false answer
Rubio did himself no favors last evening; quoting Jay-Z and The Godfather during his portion of the filibuster....he's been relegated to lightweight status.
Wow. he was regulated to lightweight status by someone who already thought he was. He must be so upset.
Rubio did himself no favors last evening; quoting Jay-Z and The Godfather during his portion of the filibuster....he's been relegated to lightweight status.
Wow. he was regulated to lightweight status by someone who already thought he was. He must be so upset.
I thought he had more of a problem in getting the nom in 2016 with you guys because of his name and skin color than his substance. Turns out he has no substance either.
intentionally misframed
in other words, a dishonest question intended to derive a false answer
That sounds like a lot of nonsense. Now there are such things as dishonest questions, but I don't think Rand's question qualifies. This administration has killed American citizens with no due process in the past. With that in mind I think it's perfectly reasonable to ask them whether they believe they can do the same thing within the United States. As for being intended to derive a false answer, I don't know what that even means. What is a false answer? An answer that is wrong? An answer that is untrue? A lie? And how would that be the fault of the person asking the question if the person answering it gave a false answer?
Rubio did himself no favors last evening; quoting Jay-Z and The Godfather during his portion of the filibuster....he's been relegated to lightweight status.
Wow. he was regulated to lightweight status by someone who already thought he was. He must be so upset.
I thought he had more of a problem in getting the nom in 2016 with you guys because of his name and skin color than his substance. Turns out he has no substance either.
intentionally misframed
in other words, a dishonest question intended to derive a false answer
That sounds like a lot of nonsense. Now there are such things as dishonest questions, but I don't think Rand's question qualifies. This administration has killed American citizens with no due process in the past. With that in mind I think it's perfectly reasonable to ask them whether they believe they can do the same thing within the United States. As for being intended to derive a false answer, I don't know what that even means. What is a false answer? An answer that is wrong? An answer that is untrue? A lie? And how would that be the fault of the person asking the question if the person answering it gave a false answer?
This nonsense is on the reactionary side. One, due process as you insist actually is not required for apprehension or termination of a threat who won't give up. Of course the admin can do it in the USA. But to suggest that somehow the question was involving the admin falsely attacking "unarmed" civilians suggests a false answer.
You are better than this. Back up.
Wow. he was regulated to lightweight status by someone who already thought he was. He must be so upset.
I thought he had more of a problem in getting the nom in 2016 with you guys because of his name and skin color than his substance. Turns out he has no substance either.
Actually, it is the right today, saying whoa, we thought he had little. Now they are rethinking and your leftist breathren are melting down.
Good for you, and now I will add something more if I may.Rand Paul's self-serving spectacle only appealed to the radical right.
So I guess killing an American on American soil with a drone while he is not engaging in combat with any other American is just fine with you. Obama has already killed an American in Yemen along with his teenage son and the son's classmate. Al three killed by a hellfire missile. I can see taking out the father but I draw the line at killing his son and his neighbors son. The father and Both minors were American born citizens. Just what does Obama have to do to get your goat? do you support him no matter what? What Rand Paul did was long over due. He spoke truth to power and won. Something the left use to admire but now you refer to it as self serving. You sir are whats wrong with America.
Wow. he was regulated to lightweight status by someone who already thought he was. He must be so upset.
I thought he had more of a problem in getting the nom in 2016 with you guys because of his name and skin color than his substance. Turns out he has no substance either.
All you've established is that you don't have a clue what you are talking about.
Romney wins in a landslide. Republicans win the Senate and keep the House.
Chris avoids this thread like he avoid his Gov Walker threads like the plague.
