The Rand problem, so how's this going to work?

[hardnox]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/18/rand-paul-nsa-reform-bill_n_6182204.html

OK, let's assume for the moment that this isn't just a craven act of political positioning on the part of Rand Paul and say that as a matter of principle he's unable to support what is obviously a very weak attempt to place some curbs on the NSA.

But he's running for the presidential nomination from the party that offered up 40 of the 41 votes to kill cloture- the other 39 because they're opposed to curbs.

Which simply means this: he won't win and if he has any impact on the platform it will be in the economics area where "libertarians" provide some pseudo-intellectual cover for the billionaire economy and he'll be a no-show on civil liberties.

Well intentioned fellow that he might be this is really pretty putrid.

Seriously, for anything that is even vaguely authentically libertarian it is third party or no party.

[hardnox]

Which party was it that provided 80% of the votes in favor of curbing a bit of the excess of Big Government?

[hardnox]

Most of the republican senators don't give a hoot about either your right to privacy or your security, which this is ostensibly about.

They do care that Karl Rove put a huge number of Security Entrepreneurs in business so that there is a steady flow of kickback money to fund the Permanent Republican Majority.

Yes, that is how mundane the purposes behind your loss of liberty are.

[Samthehumble]

You could go with the idea that he will lead the party in the right direction. I think many democrsys voted with thr direction obama wanted to go despite not being all that thrilled with fascism. And during Bush's term you got a bunch of social programs the r's shouldnt have been thrilled with. In the end i wouldnt spend much time worrying about it pauls odds are slim. Eventually you'll find a reason to go with the lessor evil.

[BA Deere]

Welcome to "presidental politics".   Okay, let`s say Rand would be on record with a vote that some how weakens the NSA..and we then had a domestic terrorist event...it would be game over, even a hick like me could write what a "candidate Hillary" would say.

Fear of terrorism is one of very few issues that transends party lines.  Bush #43 got alot of democrat votes for the only reason that he played offense on terrorism.  I fell for Ron Paul`s rhetoric about "get out of Iraq..you just pack up tomorrow and leave!"  that was one good thing I secretly thought about Obama, he would at least get us out of the M.E. well he dragged his feet and when it finally did somewhat happen, we now got ISIS and these beheadings.

What is happening with Rand is probably part of the reason that senators generally have a tougher time getting elected president. 

Even with me, in this day and age if we didn`t have a NSA wouldn`t that be foolish?  I want the gov to keep tabs on the bad guys, I don`t have secrets, I don`t text my "junk" on the internet.  My phone calls are about farming and how much I hate Democrats and a text to bring home a gallon of skim and a gallon of 1%. 

And naked celebrities?  I`ve seen `em all, everyone`s junk all over, it isn`t a big deal anymore  ..yawn. 

One thing, Rand would stop that using the NSA and IRS against political "enemies" as the Obama administration has...this whole administration recks of a 3rd world banana dicatorship, doing things Richard Nixon never dreamed of.

[hardnox]

Purdy weak, boys.

Not that I expected to convince anyone of anything.

[Samthehumble]

Like i said, lets not pretend youre not voting for whoever the dems trot out. This is just preening right?

[Samthehumble]

To be fair.  I'm not voting for the d.  Unless its sanders.  Of course i can say that.with 0 risk of having to do it

[hardnox]

No, I'll 100% guarantee you that I'll not vote for anyone named Bush or Clinton, even if its Reggie and George.

BTW, I wonder how many political junkies who watch House of Cards recognize the Underwoods as near perfect capture of the Clintons- soulless vessels of ambition who buy their power by pretending to be somewhat progressive but actually sell out at every turn.

[hardnox]

BTW, in the matter of The Underwoods being a portrayal of The Clintons.

The GOP MO for 7 years has been to portray Obama not only as a Kenyan socialist muslim Manchurian candidate but also, as needed, a vacuous narcissist, homesexual, etc.

As far as any guage any of us can have of normalcy, The Clinton's marriage is clearly a sham of convenience between two ambitious sociopaths.  Obama, on the other hand is married to someone who obviously is and is from Good People and by all appearances they have a strong marriage.

That's a fairly strong indication that he is psychologically sound.