by Jack
It wasn’t planned, it was one of these carpe’ diem moment a grand epiphany that took his peers by complete surprise. A courageous Rand Paul stepped forward like the patriots of old, and did what many his peers could only admire and respect, if not for his views then for his patriotism. In his address that often tugged at the heart, he swayed republicans and democrats alike and moved them to his side of the isle, slowly at first, then the news of what he was doing spread and they came to here him.
Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul has emerged tired and victorious from his 13-hour long filibuster. He has established himself as a true national political leader having accomplished what had been viewed as impossible, the unification of the divergent political entities within the GOP and many democrats on the issue of civil liberties.
“You literally saw the shift happen over the course of the day,” Brian Doherty of Reason magazine said. “It started with Rand Paul, and then it was just [Sens.] Mike Lee and Ted Cruz. And then you had people like Marco Rubio and Saxby Chambliss joining in. And by the end of it, [Republican Minority Leader] Mitch McConnell was on the floor saying he was going to block [CIA Director John] Brennan’s confirmation, and [RNC Chairman] Reince Priebuswas tweeting that Senators should go join Rand Paul.”
“Who knows, maybe in two years, the filibuster won’t seem like a big deal,” he added. “But today, it feels like everything has changed. Today, it feels like the Republican Party is different.”
“Doherty conceded that, for some conservatives, the embrace of Paul’s civil liberties argument may be chalked up to antagonism toward the Obama administration. But, he added, “if that’s what it takes to get Rush Limbaugh to say that he agrees with Rand Paul, that he’s open to these ideas, I’ll take it.”
“Paul’s 13-hour stand on civil liberties also solidified his standing among the more purist fans of his father, Ron Paul, who have long been skeptical of the younger Paul’s dedication to the Movement.”
This was a proud moment in US history and it signalled the beginning of redemption for the Republican/Libertarians long lost in the political wilderness.
For more on this story click here.
I’m glad to see that at the end of the day, after the media coverage of Rand Paul was positive, McConnell and Priebus “bravely” supported him. Cowards.
I thought what Rand did was a brave action take for our benefit. After asking for over six weeks for clairification on how and what action this administration would do with drons in the US against non-combative US citizens he got his “snarky” answer from Holder saying he was asking a new question. The question wasn’t new and any one who watched all or most of Rand’s filibuster would have understand it wasn’t.
Most disappointing was McCain and Graham’s response the next day on the Senate floor attacking Rand. It was obvious that they had both gone home and to bed after having dinner with Obama and were clueless as to what happaned in their absense. I even, for the first time ever, called and emailed them both telling them what a disappointment they were and that I would contribute to see them removed during their next election.
I felt as if I was watching a historical moment and a breath of life breathed into the GOP that was on life support at best. The 2014 election will, in my opinion, determine its fate.
There were 2 filibusters going on that day. One was Rand Paul showing leadership, and the other was a group of political dinosaurs chowing down on the taxpayer dime.
Thank you Rand Paul!
Yeah, while I have to give props to Paul, who I usually disagree with, I am hugely skeptical about some of the hangers-on. Mitch McConnel, for instance, doesn’t give a damn about drones or civil liberties, he cares about politically defeating Obama.
But overall, I hope this is a wake-up call for both parties, as well as the country as a whole. Everyone has been too silent over the real assault on civil liberties, which has nothing to do with healthcare.
Speaking of Rush Limbaugh, did you hear how he celebrated International Women’s Day?
“A long time ago the feminazis began their quest to make women more like men, which is what feminaziism is, essentially, all about – to dress like us, acquire power like us, have careers like us, all that, that’s really what it was all about.”
Tina, I think Rush just called you a feminazi, since you have a career and (I assume) sometimes like to wear pants.
The latest from Rand Paul.
Rand Paul on Filibuster: I’m Just Getting Started:
Paul, in a Friday op-ed in the Washington Post, wrote that while the Senate eventually confirmed John Brennan as director of the CIA, “this debate isn’t over.”
“The Senate has the power to restrain the executive branch — and my filibuster was the beginning of the fight to restore a healthy balance of powers,” Paul wrote.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/03/08/Rand-Paul-on-Filibuster-I-m-Just-Getting-Started
Washington Post article- two pages:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/sen-rand-paul-my-filibuster-was-just-the-beginning/2013/03/08/6352d8a8-881b-11e2-9d71-f0feafdd1394_story.html
Chris: “Tina, I think Rush just called you a feminazi, since you have a career and (I assume) sometimes like to wear pants.”
I don’t really qualify since he was referring in that moment to the original gang of (8-10) women he affectionately refers to as “feminazi’s”. However I do wear pants, almost exclusively.
I completely agree with Rush that these women went overboard in their methods. Much of what they did and said was anti-man more than pro-woman. They included: Screeching, blame/hate filled voices; indignant rebuffs to gentlemanly behaviors like holding open a door or holding a woman’s coat for her; insisting that women be included in traditionally all male schools, clubs and activities, including being able to enter male locker rooms when covering sports events; taking the attitude that men never had to struggle hard or never experienced being looked over for promotions. These attitudes were insensitive, stupid, prejudiced, and frankly, filled with (bitchy) bad manners.
Most men (were) willing to have women in the work place. Most were willing to see them rise as far as they wished to go up the ladder of success. Feminazi types gave them little room to make adjustments that had to be as difficult for them as it was for women entering into new territory. Some of the attitudes and beliefs that they forced on society are proving to be wrong. One in particular is that boys and girls are trained to be different. Another is that divorce doesn’t hurt children and children don’t need fathers.
Now back to the subject at hand!
“Mitch McConnel, for instance, doesn’t give a damn about drones or civil liberties, he cares about politically defeating Obama.”
No surprise there. We on the right all want to defeat Obama, he’s destroying the country!
What in the world is so unusual about wanting to defeat a man that has presided over the worst economic recovery since WWII and the complete resurgence of Al Qaeda?
McConnel’s remarks show that he shares the legitimate concerns expressed by Paul:
You might want to redirect your snide remarks about McConnell to Barack Obama who, according to PolitiFact was pretty outspoken, making him either wrong on such matters or a flat out hypocrite:
Gee Chris, what do you think, hypocrite?
There is the issue of rights and there is the issue of terrorism and the war being waged against us, whether acknowledged by this administration or not.
I don’t like this idea much but I can envision a scenario where an American citizen quietly turns his back on his country, swears allegiance to our enemies, and agrees to deliver a nuke or biological to a venue such as a football stadium. I can imagine a president, whether this one or the next where a difficult decision might have to be made because a man is traveling in a remote area of Texas or Kansas and he’s carrying a WMD with the intention of killing a lot of American citizens.
I would expect that any president, given this power in a time of war (whether acknowledged or not) would be restrained in the same way that many presidents have been restrained since the advent of nuclear weaponry and the presidential “football”.
Rand Paulwas heroic in demanding, through the use of the filibuster, an answer to the question he had respectfully asked in many earlier inquiries that went unanswered.
Bravo to Rand Paul!
Peggy we don’t hear about it much in the press because the press never wants to give republicans the time of day unless it’s to join in a smear campaign against them, but republicans all over the country are working to restore our republic’s balance of power and earn the trust and confidence of the people. It will be fun to see what Rand Paul has up his sleeve in this regard.
It would be lovely if Rand got people in power thinking about this shit … but I can’t be hopeful.
Let me tell you about a job interview I had last week, in an office tower in San Francisco. Rare is the office building in SF wherein you can just walk up to the elevator bank and hit the button. Even in buildings sans elevator keycards, you have to present yourself at the security desk and have your name checked off of a list, on which, hopefully, but not invariably, it was placed the day before.
This building had a security desk … and … turnstiles to the elevators. Having been checked off the list, I was printed a piece of cardboard with a bar code on it for the turnstile to read and grant me admittance, always supposing I were possessed of the agility and grace to slip and pull the card, then slip through the gate … but what can I tell you? I am old now.
The “piece de resistance”, however, I encountered on the floor, in the lobby of the office. While waiting for my interviewer, and reading in “The Economist” all about the dire state of the profession … a computed voice booms: “security violation; shut the door … security violation; shut the door”.
An employee had exited a door behind the receptionist inappropriately, apparently.
I got the job … but I do not want the job. I think I might possibly want to die.
But probably not on Monday. Probably, on Monday I will submit myself to the indignities dictated by a lot of craven, crap-headed, one-percenters. But you know, some day I will reach my limit, and I’m not sure that there is any point at all in expiring quietly.
Congratulation on getting the job!Libby, maybe someday you will be amongst the 1%, or at least 5%:)
Good Luck and Best Wishes.
Libs you are NOT old! Let’s get that straight right now. Consider upper middle age is roughly 65-75. Yes, you are getting to be a senior as in top seniority, a valued and wise member of the “experienced” work force.
Unfortunately, we can’t all do what we love, so we must learn to love what we do. And that includes loving those pinheads that supervise you. That’s just life and we’ve all suffered through it, but you need not suffer this too much longer for social security is right around the corner.
Question, do you approve of the security at big office buildings? It’s fine in my opinion and it began long before terrorism, but it’s allabout protecting you so I don’t see anything wrong with it.
I wish you much luck and happiness in your new job Libs…but, you must go in with a positive attitude! here’s something I do, try to compete against your own high standards, challenge yourself to be a little better with each task, make it a sort of silent internal competition. You’ll be fine! Enjoy the adventure, it’s all good sweetie! Your truly “old” friend Jack
Surely they can’t all be “craven, crap-headed people, Libby?
At any rate…I do wish you well in your new job and I hope you manage to find a few people that will make your job pleasant and enjoyable.
” It’s fine in my opinion and it began long before terrorism, ….”
Ah, but it didn’t. You are simply choosing to remember it that way, you racist, you … equating Arab and terrorist. It didn’t start with them Arabs; it all started with Mr. White (who was a terrorist), and how’s that for irony?
Rand wasn’t talking about them Arabs, darling; he was talking about you … and me … and our toleration of this horseshit which is our public life.
Libby, I was talking about building security starting before 9/11. It’s true Libby, don’t you remember? This was a trend that began with regulating people coming and going, most for theft deterence reasons but also to help prevent work place violence and just general security.
Next: Racism, huh? Ummm…not sure why would you say that, did I miss something? I have a bad cold so I am not operating 100%.