Rand Paul's filibuster

HI STUPID!

WTF has actually stepped into the truth for a change. If I asked you not to shoot Santa you would say I'm am not going to shoot Santa. You ask Obama (Holder) that he not kill Americans on American soil and he can't answer the question. WTF sees the truth but is not willing to acknowledge it. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

No, if you ask me not to shoot Santa as a serious question, I would roll my eye's at your delusional ass.

Now exNYer would cheer you if you stood out side my house all night yelling "Promise not to shoot Santa" and instead of coming down there and kicking your ass like I should have, I placate your dumb ass.

That is all that was done.

Gnadfly has asked the correct question in this thread, sorry you Rand Paulies are to busy buttfucking eack other to see it.

Same thing your mother said when she calfed you.


You can make the same stupid analogies to fantasy figures all day long. You are getting like WE1911 with his evolution posts.

It doesn't change the value of what Paul did. And I don't even care for the guy's politics. Originally Posted by ExNYer

You are correct. It had ZERO value before I made fun of it and it has ZERO value after.

They were not going to drone any citizens in this country that were not engaged in combat, in fact they were not going to drone anybody engaged in combat, now they can.

IMHO, they should not be able to drone period.

That has been my point....Rand Paul just gave them a huge opening by asking the wrong question.

the simpletons miss the point of the filibuster ...

Paul stood up and yammered for 13 hours to delay the vote on a nomination. THE END.

He could have expounded on the issues surrounding one blue sock and one brown sock had he chose.

Like I said earlier, aside form anything else, Paul just made an impression on the voting public thus starting the process of getting his name on the 2016 ballot ..

You are correct. It had ZERO value before I made fun of it and it has ZERO value after.

They were not going to drone any citizens in this country that were not engaged in combat, in fact they were not going to drone anybody engaged in combat, now they can.
No. If someone is actually engaged in combat against the US (i.e., an armed insurrection), then POTUS can use whatever fucking weapons he wants, not just drones. So he can send tanks after them if he wants. That was true BEFORE the filibuster and it is still true.

IMHO, they should not be able to drone period.
So, if an actual shooting war broke out, you wouldn't be in favor of suing drones to suppress a rebellion? How about tanks and helicopter gunships?

That has been my point....Rand Paul just gave them a huge opening by asking the wrong question.
No, he didn't. The POTUS can't do anything he could not do before. But he is now on record as saying that drones can't be used against Americans "engaged in terrorism" as opposed to "engaged in combat". Originally Posted by WTF

It is a simple concept that I do not expect you to grasp.

Like I said earlier, aside form anything else, Paul just made an impression on the voting public thus starting the process of getting his name on the 2016 ballot .. Originally Posted by CJ7

Good for him! I'm not ready to vote Republican, but if he keeps this up, I might, if he gets the nomination.

I would be so different if we had a President that believed in freedom, and actually stood for something other than big banks and corporations.

Good for him! I'm not ready to vote Republican, but if he keeps this up, I might, if he gets the nomination.

I would be so different if we had a President that believed in freedom, and actually stood for something other than big banks and corporations. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

big banks and corporations rule the political empire, T-H-A-T will never change, regardless who or what gets elected into office

You might actually be right, this time, CBJ7. But it would be fun to try. And since you feel that way, why do you continually support the most sold out President we've ever had?

You might actually be right, this time, CBJ7. But it would be fun to try. And since you feel that way, why do you continually support the most sold out President we've ever had? Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

just because I run over your bullshit like a steamroller doesnt mean I suppport anyone .. youve conjured that belief up in your own little mind ...

Bullshit. I've supported Obama more time than you have opposed him. You are a dyed-in-the-wool Obamaton.

Bullshit. I've supported Obama more time than you have opposed him. You are a dyed-in-the-wool Obamaton. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

yeah, we've ALLLLLL noticed !!!

I have supported Obama on the DREAM Act, and on his handling of OBL's son-in-law. I have also praised his SCOTUS appointments on a couple of recent cases. What have you opposed Obama on? Nothing. Just as I thought.

I have supported Obama on the DREAM Act, and on his handling of OBL's son-in-law. I have also praised his SCOTUS appointments on a couple of recent cases. What have you opposed Obama on? Nothing. Just as I thought. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

and you post a dozen threads a day RIGHT HERE reming everyone what a POS Obie is


gimme a freakin break .. go piss on whirlies leg and tell him its raining, I AINT BUYING YOU SUPPORT OBAMA HORSESHIT !

I support him when he is right. It doesn't happen very often.

I have supported Obama on the DREAM Act, and on his handling of OBL's son-in-law. I have also praised his SCOTUS appointments on a couple of recent cases. What have you opposed Obama on? Nothing. Just as I thought. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

The view from the fence...

Gotta hurt when you're leaning so far to one side your ass doesn't really fit the fence anymore?

How many times have you called POTUS a TYRANT? How many times have you supported his views? How many times have you called the GOP leadership tyrants? How about the TPE?

Naw, I ain't buying it either, Whiny!