Rand Paul filibuster live on the Senate floor

originally posted by: LDragonFire
a reply to: Sublimecraft

It was first penned after the Oklahoma city bombing, penned and submitted by a democrat but failed in congress.

I think it was Joe Biden

Yes and the DHS was fully conceived and described before 911 as well.

NSSG - Road Map for National Security

originally posted by: LDragonFire
the Constitution states we face 2 threats one is foreign the other domestic. The patriot act was touted to protect us against foreign threats, but is increasingly being used in domestic issues. The domestic threat could also be the government, and in this case the patriot act doesn't protect citizens at all

Paul started his filibuster with this

"There comes to a time in the history of nations when fear and complacency allow power to accumulate and liberty and privacy to suffer," Paul started. "That time is now. And I will not let the Patriot Act, the most un-patriotic of acts, go unchallenged." -Sen Rand Paul

Thanks for the quote, I don't get the impression that he is blowing hot air.

That said, I have been wrong about politicians in each and every case I have ever given them the benefit of the doubt.

originally posted by: TinfoilTP
If he ends the spying then a horrific terror attack will take place from failure to detect it and his anti war isolationism will be out the door for another 50 years at least. He is making himself obsolete.

Obama and all the Dems ramrodded health care down our throats yet they kept the Patriot Act hmmm. Could it be they didn't want Pearl Harbor on their watch because it actually works which outweighed the negatives for them?

”Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither.” - Benjamin Franklin

I stand 100% with Rand on this.

perhaps i am missing something.....


but isn't this just grandstanding? He is filibustering a vote that likely wouldn't pass(?)

a reply to: LDragonFire

Rand is...and ever will be...a pandering showman lacking substance. Put simply, you are confusing ideals with running for President.

Rand Paul was holding the floor for an extended period. But it wasn't a filibuster because it was not blocking consideration of the Patriot Act renewal (House or Senate version), nor was it really delaying it in any meaningful way.

....

it was really just a long speech intended to attract attention.

www.npr.org...

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
perhaps i am missing something.....


but isn't this just grandstanding? He is filibustering a vote that likely wouldn't pass(?)

You are not missing anything. That is exactly it.

Wide open borders since 9/11, but we need the Patriot Act? You really gotta wonder. ~$heopleNation

a reply to: Indigo5

I thought so.


I don't care much for Rand Paul. Not sure if its the "Im hopped up on Prozac" eyes, or the wad of yarn he wears for a toupee.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I don't agree with much of his fathers platform, but deeply respect his honesty and how he speaks his truth without concern for popularity, something we need so much more of in politics.

I neither respect nor like Rand...his verbage is shifting collage of bumper-stickers aimed at pandering to a target audience and his love of hearing himself speak is endless.

Has he read "Green Eggs & Ham" yet?

originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: LDragonFire

Rand is...and ever will be...a pandering showman lacking substance. Put simply, you are confusing ideals with running for President.

Rand Paul was holding the floor for an extended period. But it wasn't a filibuster because it was not blocking consideration of the Patriot Act renewal (House or Senate version), nor was it really delaying it in any meaningful way.

....

it was really just a long speech intended to attract attention.

www.npr.org...

Nice job!
I was going to post this ^ earlier when I found out it really wasnt a filibuster but a grab for attention. I'm sure he is sincere about trying to get rid of the Patriot Act, but essentially just wasting everyone's time with his opinion isnt going to help.

I for one am glad he did it. Even if it was for attention. Voters need to know exactly WHO is against this POS law.

I will not vote for anyone who supports it.

originally posted by: poncho1982
I for one am glad he did it. Even if it was for attention. Voters need to know exactly WHO is against this POS law.

I will not vote for anyone who supports it.

You probably won't have anyone to vote for, then.

originally posted by: JRCrowley

originally posted by: poncho1982
I for one am glad he did it. Even if it was for attention. Voters need to know exactly WHO is against this POS law.

I will not vote for anyone who supports it.

You probably won't have anyone to vote for, then.

Honestly, I was thinking the same thing when I wrote that.

I hope beyond hope, that Rand Paul gets the nomination, but I don't believe that our political system in America is legitimate.

But mark my words, they will do everything in their power to keep him out. I wouldn't even doubt that the Dems and GOP work together to do that, because despite what the polls say, I think he would trounce Hillary. (if she even gets the Dem nomination)

originally posted by: poncho1982
I for one am glad he did it. Even if it was for attention. Voters need to know exactly WHO is against this POS law.

I will not vote for anyone who supports it.

Totally agree

I thought I was gonna wake to a new extension of the patriot act, but I was wrong. McConnell attempted to extend the act for 2 months and it failed he tried for a June 8, June 5, June 2 extensions and all failed, now they will get together May 31 for one last attempt to keep the law alive.

Rand Paul may be successful in his attempt to defeat this law.

originally posted by: stellawayten
a reply to: Granite

What happened to the old ats? I wanna go there.

It exist only in small numbers nowadays especially the "Deny ignorance" crowd. Sad but true.