I’d suggest that anyone in the mainstream american political system has to be, too much money, too much vested interest for it not to be, sadly.
‘America PLC’ comes first, historic nod to liberty second(if that).
Eh, he probably felt it would have been bad for his political future to filibuster. Obama probably had drinks with him and explained it to him. ;)
Rand’s supposed selling point is that he sticks to the courage of his convictions, etc.
He spoke out against AND voted against the reauthorization. If your theory that he is a total libertarian faker rests upon the fact he didnt fillibuster a bill with almost 90% support then you are making a huge reach that the facts dont support.
Let me step in and lend a hand. I speak Jason.
He knows that, since he uses that apology for Democrats all the time. He merely wants to show that Rand Paul’s shit stinks just as much as the rest of the Senate.
What are you talking about?? He did take the right, doomed position in the face of certain loss. And he couldn’t “hold up the works until they gave up,” because there was a large enough majority that they would immediately vote to end the filibuster anyway. Do you even understand what a filibuster is and how it works?
I think Jason is saying he should have tried to filibuster, filed a hold, done whatever procedural tricks he could - even if he knew they wouldn’t work - just to delay it even another day, even another hour.
If he had, I would have donated money to his campaign.
Well one thing that frustrates me with Jason about this is that a person who could stop it, President Obama, wont stop it and gets a pass because politically Jason doesnt think Obama can do it. But a person who cant do a thing to stop it, but at least speaks out and votes against it, gets called a fake.
Right. If you run as a getting things done technocrat like Obama, caving on what’s political possible is in keeping with that. If you run as a true believer, it’s really out of character to just shrug and vote against it in the Senate. Also, while I personally think Obama is lying and he’d dump the Patriot Act if he could, his official public position is supporting.
For comparison, Sanders tried to filibuster the tax cut extension.
Tim’s right - I think he’s just a total fake like almost all the rest of them. At least the others don’t pretend though to get that sweet blimp money. Unlike his Dad the true believer, I think Rand is just playing the rubes like a fiddle.
This is inane, and splitting hairs to a tremendous degree. So you voted the way you think he should have, but you think he’s fake because he didn’t use every delaying tactic he could come up with, even if they are absolutely and completely useless? You’re just trying to find some trivial excuse to criticize the guy.
It’s not out of character to do whatever you can within the system to stop it. Delaying it by an hour (for example) wouldn’t actually stop it, so what would be the point of doing that? To speak out against it? He has already done that.
So Sanders did something that had no effect, and Rand Paul chose not to do something that would have no effect. I don’t see the difference. It’s the political equivalent of saying, “I didn’t get you a birthday present, but I thought about getting you one! Doesn’t that count?”
I don’t care about him one way or the other, Andy. I was making a stab at guessing Jason’s opinion, and saying that if he had pulled out all of the stops, tried every single tactic, tried to buy every hour, I’d have given him money.
Mostly because it would have been hilarious, but also because if there were ten people doing that, maybe some real time would have been bought, or maybe it wouldn’t have passed at all.
I’ll support any politician who pulls out all of the stops to try to halt bills like this, but beyond that, I don’t know or care about Senator Rand beyond what I’ve read on Qt3. (The senators in the state where I can actually vote, on the other hand, I know a good deal about.)
For somebody who bashes America constantly, you seem to know shockingly little about it. We don’t call it a PLC here.
Yeah i guess i’m used to seeing ‘UK PLC’ and just transposed that, inside brackets as an ‘example’.
And how can i not know about ‘America PLC’? I see it’s effect all around me, all over the world. From war in the middle-east, to all the chinese goods that flood all buying choices(all backed by american+western investment)? This is a world of corporate-democracy, and most of that philosophy and financial backing comes from the good old usa, and frankly it’s ‘killing the world’ while making a few elite extremely wealthy.
As for the patriot-act, it is just one small part of the neo-fascist movement that is sweeping through the american(and then other western systems) political landscape and it has a ‘mission’ for all of you.
As Rage Against the Machine once said ‘Know your enemy’. Your kids will thank you for it.
(Edit: as someone you have identified who ‘bashes America constantly’, please understand i love what america should be, but it often isn’t and i have a view on why that is the case. If that view upsets anyone, i’m sorry about that, but i’m not an angry anti-american euro nerd furious at the world, i’m a very chill guy happy with his world and curious about how others view theirs)
Jason, I usually understand you, even when we disagree and argue. But I don’t here.
Obama gets a pass and you make excuses for him, even though you are saying he is lying and supporting something he doesn’t believe in for purely political purposes. I.e. low integrity by definition. That’s OK.
Rand - who I cannot stand, BTW - spoke against this, voted against it, did everything except waste an hour on trying to filibuster (and you’ve repeatedly lambasted people who criticize the Dems for not even attempting a filibuster or to take on the filibuster as a symbolic gesture because it would be a waste of time) and he is the target of your contempt?
So one guy opposes it, speaks out against it, tells the world why it’s a terrible idea, votes against it, and he’s the phony. Another guy, in your opinion, doesn’t like it but lies about it, speaks in favor of it, and pushes for a bill he philosophically opposes, and he gets a break?
There are reason’s to dislike Rand Paul, many reasons, but in this case he’s taken a higher integrity stand than Obama.
Stop deriving your political philosophies from RATM.
Nope, he hasn’t. He didn’t filibuster, he didn’t try to hold up an unrelated bill. He made a nice speech and then gave up and went home. By Senate standards its pattycake.
NO! Try not. DO, or do not. There is no “try.”
Seriously, though, I’m with Jeff. I’m not sure why you are placing such a premium on symbolic gestures, here–even going so far as to rate them more important than actions that lead to actual results. I’m not a fan of Rand Paul, but I don’t see any great abandonment of principle, here.
If you’re trying to figure out whether he really is a libertarian true believer - or just a lying partisan hack - I’d imagine symbolic gestures would count.
Well, again: why? How does declining to make an utterly useless gesture with no chance of success invalidate a person’s ideological conviction? That doesn’t even make sense.