• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Rand Paul opens the gates for muslim's to sack America

 
 
 
ksen

ksen

Contributor
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
6,540
Location
Florida
Basic Beliefs
Calvinist
U.S. Surveillance Powers Lapse After Senate Deal Is Blocked

As of 12:01 this morning, some provisions of the 9/11-era Patriot Act, including the NSA's controversial collection of bulk phone data, have now been stopped following an unprecedented Sunday in the U.S. Senate, during which legislators made a last-ditch effort to prevent the lapse with new legislation, only to be stymied by Senator Rand Paul. Delayed but not deterred, the Senate now seems certain to approve some version of the new bill as late as Tuesday, which means, barring further complications, it could be signed into law by the end of the week, according to the Associated Press. In the meantime, three parts of the Patriot Act have now been nullified.
Click to expand...

Why does Rand Paul hate America?
 
This is important legislation. If the damn librul Democrats could just get over their inane objections to the "Rand Paul gets to beat black people to death with a hammer" rider on the bill, we could get back to allowing the government to anallly probe the foriegn folk to see if they have any bombs hidden up there.

Thanks, Obama :mad:
 
I think I can say without hyperbole that we are all going to die.
 
Am I the only one who's really skeptical that the filibuster did anything at all to stop spying?
 
In fact, the methods are likely still being used under the understanding that it'll be retroactively approved in upcoming legislation.
 
article said:
The Court said that it wasn't enough to convict the man based solely on the idea that a reasonable person would regard his communications as a threat.
Click to expand...
But in Florida, a person can kill another under the same situation.
 
Jimmy Higgins said:
article said:
The Court said that it wasn't enough to convict the man based solely on the idea that a reasonable person would regard his communications as a threat.
Click to expand...
But in Florida, a person can kill another under the same situation.
Click to expand...

But that is a killing job of the individual, not any of the state's business.
 
The fact of the matter is, Rand Paul is the only Republican that has any appeal to me.

He is right about some things.

He is totally wrong about unleashing the power of capitalists, we've already seen what they do without constraint too many times.
 
Jimmy Higgins said:
In fact, the methods are likely still being used under the understanding that it'll be retroactively approved in upcoming legislation.
Click to expand...

"Intelligence" agencies don't need no stinkin' laws. Their whole existence is deceit and secrecy. We don't know they've stopped torturing. They just appear to keep on doing what they've been doing. Under the cover of "classified," State Secret, and I am sure a million other labels, they pretty much do as they please. These outfits...CIA, NSA, etc., have broken all our laws for years. Bush just tried to make some of what they have been doing more legal. When we as citizens cannot see their finances, we cannot be sure of what they are doing.
 
I do like Rand Paul better than most Republicans, because he actually seems to think about issues. The trouble is, he's a moron. But a moron who thinks, which is better than a smarter man who doesn't.
 
So, even though he's making enemies in his own party by opposing the USAPATRIOT Act, he's worthy of ridicule for doing so. By supporting an issue supported by rank-and-file Democrats but opposed by elected Democrats.

But he's a Republican, and he's Ron Paul's son, and he might be opposing the Hilldebeest in 2016, so you're not allowed to say "ok on this issue at this time he's actually doing something right."
 
Jason Harvestdancer said:
So, even though he's making enemies in his own party by opposing the USAPATRIOT Act, he's worthy of ridicule for doing so. By supporting an issue supported by rank-and-file Democrats but opposed by elected Democrats.

But he's a Republican, and he's Ron Paul's son, and he might be opposing the Hilldebeest in 2016, so you're not allowed to say "ok on this issue at this time he's actually doing something right."
Click to expand...


You've no doubt heard the old phrase "its the thought that counts"? Or how about "his heart is in the right place"?


Well this is neither of those things.

Yes, opposing the Patriot Act is a good idea. We handed over far too much of our privacy in exchange for a dubious amount of security. But what Rand did here was in a way akin to what the Democrats who voted in favor of the original act did. What the Democrats who voted in favor of the Iraq war did. Made a decision based on purely political grounds and under purely political circumstances.

Paul needs something to make him stand out among the increasing number of occupants of the Republican clown car, and this was a perfect opportunity. He took a procedural peculiarity of the Senate rules and used it to make it seem as if he's this lone stalwart standing for freedom. Very clever, but rather than win back our lost privacy, he merely delayed the inevitable passage of a bill in order to give him some media coverage for a couple days. It was grandstanding. Pure political theater.

Rand Paul is (and I know you hate this term) a conservolibertarian. He's libertarian when it suits him, but mostly a garden variety wing nut conservative. Even if I believed this fake filibuster were sincere (and I don't), it doesn't get him off the hook for all the other crazy shit he's said and done.


Would you give Hillary credit if she'd done something you agree with? Given the name-calling, I'd guess the answer to be a firm "no."
 
Ford said:
Rand Paul is (and I know you hate this term) a conservolibertarian. He's libertarian when it suits him, but mostly a garden variety wing nut conservative. Even if I believed this fake filibuster were sincere (and I don't), it doesn't get him off the hook for all the other crazy shit he's said and done.
Click to expand...

It's been so long since we've seen a conservative who wasn't a neocon or theocon that we've forgotten all the rest of the conservatives. I agree he is a conservative.

But he's not described by the favorite abusive TOS-violating flame of the forum's resident Poe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom