by | March 12, 2013 · 10:26 pm
↓ Jump to Comments

Why Rand Paul’s March 6th “Filibuster” Is a Big Deal

18 Comments

Filed under In The News, Politics

Tagged as

18 responses to “Why Rand Paul’s March 6th “Filibuster” Is a Big Deal”

  1. Joy Daniels Brower
    March 13, 2013 at 12:41 am

    Very interesting, Isabel!! I’ve never really been a fan of Rand Paul – and certainly not of his father! But the filibuster grabbed my attention, and I admit to looking at him with new eyes! OTOH, I still can’t figure why (although he gave a valid? certainly a convoluted! reason) he voted YEA for both pro-Sharia, anti-Zionist jerks, Hagel the Bagel and John Brennan, after all was said & done. Shouldn’t he have at least voted NAY for both, particularly Brennan? But I think it was more about his anti-drone position than any consideration for the State of Israel, where, no doubt, he shares many of the views that those two lame cabinet members do.

    Reply
    • Isabel Matos
      March 13, 2013 at 8:39 am

      Joy,

      Amen, the “filibuster” got our attention, and the whole point of my piece is to ask questions, which is what you are doing. Although it was an attention grabber, it may not have been a genuine attempt to effect change, but to use the time to promote himself (mastering the art of his father). Brennan was confirmed and DRONES will still be used. If people are willing to settle for crumbs, what can I do or say?

      Check this out:
      http://patdollard.com/2013/03/senior-obama-official-rand-pauls-filibuster-had-no-effect-in-our-drone-policy-we-will-still-kill-americans/

      Reply
      • Stephen
        March 13, 2013 at 6:26 pm

        I really think you are kind of confused and it was more like babbling. Ran Paul is a great man and a hero for sticking his neck out for every american. At least he is trying. Why dont you name someone else whos trying to make real change not a pipedream. Rand Paul is the only one for the actual people and not himself. So you are confused or a McCain or Obama supporter. What a shame and Palin oh my god what a nightmare.

      • Gary P Jackson
        March 13, 2013 at 7:02 pm

        As publisher of this website, I’ll stand by Isabel.

        Now Isabel and I disagree about the usefulness of Rand’s filibuster. I indeed supported him, and my incredible Senator Ted Cruz, who is a great leader and definitely looking to bring America back to greatness. So is Senator Mike Lee of Utah, who stood with Rand.

        Many of us have come to realize that Rand is looking to carry on the business of running for president until he is old and senile like his nut-job father, and it’s troubling. Rand’s vote AGAINST stopping Iran from developing nukes shows that he is just like his father, and incredibly dangerous. Hell, even all of the radical democrats voted to stop Iran. Rand was the ONLY vote against.

        I think what Rand did, filibustering Brennan, was good, but he never really took on Brennan, or his ideology, so what was the point? Rand also voted for Chuck Hagel, a truly despicable human being.

        Rand is a decent Senator, and I hope he has a nice career. But he’s already eying the presidency which is ludicrous, at best. No way the man is qualified to be president.

      • Joy Daniels Brower
        March 13, 2013 at 10:03 pm

        Stephen, you crossed that line in the sand where I once saw a potential ally disappear into something very ugly & ignorant – i.e., another Palin-hater/basher! With your nasty, ignorant remark when Isabel just so much as mentioned Sarah Palin’s name, all YOU could say in response was , “What a nightmare!” Well IMHO, with your hero, Rand Paul’s recent grandstanding, I’d say this his ascendancy in the GOP (actually, unlikely to happen any time soon, thank God!) would be the REAL “nightmare!”

      • Gary P Jackson
        March 13, 2013 at 11:07 pm

        I guess I missed Stephen’s jab at Governor Palin. That’s pretty common for the Ron Paul nutters though. They know Palin is the real deal, and the cult takes a dim view of anyone who mighte take the shine off of their false idol.

        Never mind Sarah Palin was the FIRST serious politician to endorse Rand Paul. In fact, without Palin’s seal of approval, Rand would still be just a doctor from Kentucky!

        Also, while democrats and GOP clowns like McCain and Graham were attacking Rand, Sarah Palin spoke up and said she had been proudly standing beside Rand since 2009!

        The Ron/Rand Paul cult doesn’t underrstand this though, or the ACTUAL leadership that Sarah Palin brings to us all.

        Other than his idiotic and suicidal foreign policy, which Palin knows is insane, she has ALSO said wonderful things about Ron Paul and his fiscal ideas. In fact, Palin is one of the few legit politicians that has said ANYTHING nice about Herr Doktor Paul.

        Here lies the rub, and this is why I cannot tolerate Ron Paul cult members. They are no different than democrats. They have a seething hate for anyone who isn’t their idol.

        Unlike the two Pauls though, who have accomplished squat, Governor Palin has SUCCESSFULLY run a city and SUCCESSFULLY run a state. The only thing the Pauls have successfully run, is their mouths! As far as having an actual impact on anything, not so much.

  2. Gary P Jackson
    March 13, 2013 at 5:06 pm

    Well done!

    Reply
  3. Stephen
    March 13, 2013 at 7:23 pm

    Well Gary they said the same thing about Obama being too young to run for president and look where he is and I think it is ludicrous for you to call Ron Paul ludicrous he is a father of the Constitution and 1 of the very few people who gives a crap about our nation. And what Rand Paul was trying to say during the filibuster is we don’t want to be killed by drones in America without a fair trial or even being charged that power should be held by no man on earth. Whats wrong with this world to call our patriots names and badmouth them. Shame on you. Good day sir

    Reply
    • Gary P Jackson
      March 13, 2013 at 9:20 pm

      Yeah and look how completely fucked up things are under Obama!

      A successful president needs to have EXECUTIVE experience, period. Congresscritters, by nature, make horrible presidents. They don’t have the skill set require to be president.

      I can’t STAND Bill Clinton, but it was his 12 years as a governor that made him a successful president. He came in with his radical wife and tried to do what Obama did, and lost Congress for the first time in 40 years. Clinton was smart enough to WORK WITH Republicans to get things done. Overall, he had a successful run, and he didn’t screw America too bad. His big mistake was taking a pass on Bin Laden 3 times, thus allowing 9/11 to happen.

      There is absolutely NO ONE in Congress with the skill set required to be president. Obama should be Exhibit A as to why you don’t elect congresscritters. The LAST congresscritter to be elected president was JFK, and his inexperience and naivete damned near got us in an all out nuclear war with the Russians! My God, GOVERNORS are mature and experienced CEOs.

      There’s a very good reason why we elect GOVERNORS. In my lifetime, we’ve only had one pathetic governor as POTUS, Jimmy Carter, but he was a hard core liberal, so …

      As for Rand;s filibuster, I know EXACTLY what he was talking about. As I said, I stood with him in his efforts, so SHAME ON YOU.

      Thing is, he accomplished absolutely nothing, because the White House has said Holder’s letter to Paul was meaningless, and they’ll kill Americans if they want to. Holder punked Rand Paul. That’s what happens to inexperienced wannabees!

      I know reality is harsh, but reality is what it is. Rand Paul has his place, and when he does well, we’ll say so, just like we’ll call him out when he does bad. But anyone who thinks he is ready to be POTUS, or even a leader in the Senate, is delusional.

      Our next president needs someone who has actually SUCCESSFULLY run a city, and/or SUCCESSFULLY run a state.

      I remember back in 2010 everyone was going crazy over Mike Pence. He had zero leadership experience. I also remember how much I admired him for telling people NO, he didn’t want to run for POTUS, and instead, ran for, and became, Indiana’s Governor. The jury’s still out, because he doesn’t have a record yet, but if he lives up to the 2010 hype, he might be qualified to be POTUS some day.

      If these congresscritter POTUS wannabees are serious, they’ll go home and run for their state’s top office and prove they know how to run a government. Elsewise they need to just do the job they were hired for and be done.

      Again shame on YOU for not giving us credit for standing with Rand and his filibuster, and shame on you for thinking we don’t understand how evil the Obama regime is, and liberals in general are. We hammer evil liberals, IN BOTH PARTIES, daily.

      Reply
    • Gary P Jackson
      March 13, 2013 at 9:33 pm

      BTW, I just caught your idiotic statement calling Ron Paul “a father of the Constitution”. OMFG! I know Ron Paul is old, and in his mind it’s still 1832, not 2013, but holy crap, you’re more delusional than the average Ron Paul cultist. Ron Paul has no clue about the Constitution. He’s a con artist, nothing more.

      The ONLY thing Ron Paul accomplished in all of his years in Congress was being one of the biggest porkers in the nation. Seriously, that con artist would LOAD up bills, he knew would pass, with pork for his cronies, then vote against the bill himself trying to fool stupid people into thinking he was some sort of fiscal Conservative. What a joke.

      Ron Paul, like rand, lives in a fantasy world when it comes to foreign policy. It’s as ridiculous as it is suicidal. Anyone who thinks Iran “has a right” to nuclear arms is as dangerous as they come.

      There’s a reason why Ron Paul never got traction as a candidate. Hell, his own district, where he’s been porking it up for decades, voted for Willard Romney over him, by 77%! We Texans overwhelmingly rejected the old fool. [Not that Romney was any prize]

      I could go on all night, but I know it’s pointless talking to Ron Paul cultists. Somehow he’s stolen your brain.

      Reply
      • Stephen
        March 13, 2013 at 9:49 pm

        Clearly you have time on your hands to badmouth toung people with cursing. You dont care about him being the only one to stand up against the bill when it was first voted on it. By father of the constitution for ron I meant he was basically the only congressman who had a perfect constitutional voting record. Take a chill pill old man. Its going to be ok. I never said a mean thing to you at all as a matter of fact who are you besides a disturbed hateful Individual. Great job you did with the party with Romney newt santorum or any of them. How convincing to the country they were. We are in disagreement clearly but im done cause there is no need for cursing or hatred im a christian and I just would rather you dont email me back. Kind of scary with your politics sir. Have a good night buddy. God bless you.

      • Gary P Jackson
        March 13, 2013 at 10:50 pm

        Sorry, but Ron Paul’s record is abysmal. He’s no “Constitutional” anything

        I see you’ve never visited our website before. That’s a damned shame, because you are way off base my man.

        Had you read our website for years, you’d know none of us can stand Willard Romney. My only contribution to Romney was writing about other things once he won the nomination. Before that we wore his liberal butt out!

        BTW, since I DIDN’T trash Romney on a daily basis after he was the nominee, I had a fair amount of “conservatives” trash me as a sell out and even an “Obama supporter” so don’t even think you got it figured out.

        If you search our site for Newt you’ll find we compared him to Obama, when it come to liberals who are dangerous to the republic. In fact, I once said Newt was MORE dangerous than Obama, and meant it. Like Ron Paul, Newt is a con man of the highest order. There isn’t a Conservative bone in the man’s body.

        Santorum is another con man. He is a big government liberal, who pushed social issues, while still being a big government, big spending liberal. Total jerk-off.

        Though there are a few good Republicans, Ted Cruz, Jim DeMint, Sarah Palin, and so on, for my money, the GOP could curl up and die, and I wouldn’t lose a drop of sleep! I wish they’d go the way of the Whigs so a responsible ADULT RUN Conservative party could come to be.

        Like Governor Palin, and Ronald Reagan before her, I am a Conservative, with a strong libertarian streak. Not the bat-shit crazy Ron Paul cult kinda libertarian, but a small government, common sense kind of libertarian.

        We probably agree on more than we disagree, but Ron Paul is a nut job, and unfortunately so are most of his cult members. After dealing with Ronulans for years, we have absolutely ZERO patience for them these days.

      • Stephen
        March 13, 2013 at 9:50 pm

        And by the way im for Rand Paul and he is foing ti win in 2016.

      • Gary P Jackson
        March 13, 2013 at 10:55 pm

        “foing ti” Sorry, don’t speak Ronulan.

        If you think Rand Paul has a shot tough, you are delusional. As soon as he starts, the democrats will remind voters that Rand said he would have voted against the Civil Rights bill, if he’d been around. Never mind DEMOCRATS voted against it en masse, and it was REPUBLICANS who worked to pass the thing. The corrupt media will brand Rand a racist, and that will be that. They will make him more toxic than that nut job Todd Aklin from Missouri!

        Rand Paul is a decent Senator, and when he gets it right I’ll stand behind him 100% but the man is not ready for prime time. He doesn’t have the ability, experience, or sense to be president, and he isn’t going to get any of that while being a Senator.

  4. MAC
    March 13, 2013 at 10:54 pm

    Anyone planning to run for President will be using “whatever things they do now” to extend into their campaign run for office …I get that. However, personally, I see a number of reasons and accomplishments out of Senator Paul’s filibuster. God’s Holy Word in its examples are for specific purposes yet, they also have a two, three, etc. fold use in other areas. So, does God get called on the carpet for those? No, of course not!

    Yes, Mr Jackson, you are right, we were all rooting for anti-drone assassination of American citizens w/o “due process”. But, 1) He was bringing this issue out into the public, particularly for BO’s duped followers to learn about it, which they would not otherwise cause MSM is NOT going to report truth or very little of anything negative against BO. 2) It actually was an opportunity to make aware to those in the right wing who do not keep up with things closely ass they should 3) Senator Paul used that 13 hrs. to speak information for many to hear and learn! 4) Did anyone notice that he did NOT use a teleprompter? Nor did he read a telephone book to pass the time! Everything was noteworthy! The man actually stood there and debated the issue(s) 5) He brought back and showed civility, courtesy and respect to his (our) opponent in the debate 6) He showed the truth of the GOP Establishment –again, they were quite willing and certainly attempted to “throw their own under the bus” but it has actually welded together those who are tired and fed up with the wimps, corporate lovers, and GOP Est. 7) Senator Paul carried out his Oath of office to God and stood for the Constitution! Where were the others carrying out THEIR Oath of office to God “to support this Constitution”? 9) …well, there is a lot more but suffice it to say Senator Rand Paul, for whatever personal reasons and self gain, his filibuster was for the American people and their Constitution!

    As for the “No” answer from Holder …I do not think anyone in their right mind believes The Government will not do what it wants to do, regardless of the Constitution, and certainly Obama has shown that true side of himself!

    Senator Paul explained why he voted for those nominees of Obama’s –as much as he disagreed with their policies, etc. I understand his reasoning and for the most part agree with him on the principle that a president should be able to have those he chooses for his cabinet, only that the (D)’s do not reciprocate, neither do THEY keep their Oath of office to God “to support this Constitution”! And that hurts all of America. I have griped at every GOP vote for (D) nominees because we have to battle for our side so much harder and often lose [those that are the best].

    I am more to the right than Senator Paul and his father, former Congressman Ron Paul, but they have stood solidly on the Constitution and on the principles of the framers. It is ironic that y’all will holler for the Constitution and use the names of George Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, etc. but then ignore their principles that you disagree: war and foreign alliances! Today’s GOP are nothing but warmongers and [neo] imperialists! George W. Bush set the stage for Obama. Between Bush and Obama we are hated around the world …who can blame the world when we have invaded or supplied others to invade, decimating their land and killing innocent civilians as “collateral damage”, most of which are women and children! –whether you want to believe it or not MSM is NOT telling us the truth about what goes on in the rest of the world!

    One last thing. It is your blog and of course you can say what you want but for me, when I see people using foul or vulgar language it simply tells me their intellect is not able to express coherently and respectfully to adults. And then when they cannot argue the message they attack the messenger. So have at it!

    My two cent rant for the day.

    Reply
    • Gary P Jackson
      March 13, 2013 at 11:20 pm

      Oh my Dear Lord, have ANY of you Ronulans every just said something concisely?

      I mean seriously, I for one, joined Ted Cruz, Sarah Palin, and others STANDING WITH RAND and defending him against all comers. Unlike some of my writers, and a number of our loyal readers, I don’t think what Rand did was a stunt. I think he was sincere, but he still got punked.

      I think over all, Rand’s filibuster was a positive. But that doesn’t make Rand presidential material.

      Look, Ted Cruz joined Rand, and is a much stronger leader, far more experienced, and is doing a hell of a lot more to advance Conservatism than Rand Paul, but you won’t see any of us hooping and hollering, or writing “Cruz 2016” as that would be ridiculous.

      Unlike Rand [or Ron} Paul, Ted Cruz is an ACTUAL constitutional scholar. Cruz clerked for Chief Justice Renquist, and was Texas’ youngest Solicitor General. He’s successful argued before the Supreme Court, on behalf of Liberty and Freedom. He’s a proven leader who I’ve seen talk at length with no notes. But he’s still just the Jr Senator from Texas, and has a bit to go. But he is most certainly our nation’s future.

      It kills me though how you cultists operate. Even though we supported Rand Paul, that doesn’t seem good enough.

      Forgive me for my vulgarity, but after dealing with Ron Paul’s little cult for years I have no patience whatsoever for the craziness they bring. You guys are no better than Obama’s Zombie worshipers.

      Reply
      • Joy Daniels Brower
        March 13, 2013 at 11:54 pm

        Thank you, Gary, for speaking up and speaking out about this almost “tempest in a teapot!” You’re right about the Ron/Rand Paul fan club, though: They DO resemble in tactics and response (certainly not, of course, in any belief system!) the O-bots who think BHO still walks on water, despite all the evidence to the contrary.
        Unfortunately, MAC makes even less sense – and is even less convincing – than his Golden Boy Rand when defending an indefensible vote, particularly his “Yea” votes for BOTH security-risk & allegiance-questionable Hagel & Brennan. As Isabel has so wisely – and passionately! – pointed out, if Paul says that the filibuster was not really about Brennan himself, then who & what in hell was it all about, anyway?!? Just a phoney – and dishonest – explanation from Hold-em-up at the INjustice Dept? If that’s the case, he could have spared his lung power…
        Brennan and Hagel ARE questionable and dubious security risks all by themselves; but, of course, given the pere et fils Paul feelings toward Israel, it’s not at all surprising that Rand Paul’s LEAST objection would be to the muzzie-convert Brennan himself!
        Consistency – at the very least – should have demanded that Paul vote “Nay” on BOTH Hagel & Brennan – even though Brennan and his Dr. Strangelove Drone Industry is probably the most dangerous – esp. to the the USA.

      • Gary P Jackson
        March 14, 2013 at 1:15 am

        I normally just delete comments from Paulbots, it saves time and aggravation! However, Isabel talked to the guy, so…

        I really want our comments section to be free and open, but these people just don’t get it. It’s why I have a zero tolerance for these loons. They are just as insane as Obama’s zombies.

        I’ll have more to say on Dear Rand in the next few days. Not gonna rip the guy to shreds, but gonna call him out when he does stupid things, as he did on Iran.

Leave a comment