Rand Paul’s Secret Weapon Is George Pataki
...
Paul’s camp is thrilled, and sees Pataki pulling primary votes from the middle lane. Pataki’s announcement speech offered almost nothing to “liberty” voters, suggesting at one point that “if necessary, American forces will be used to actually defeat and destroy ISIS so they can pose no threat to us here.” Pataki seemed to be climbing on a rickety cart that might contain Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, Lindsey Graham, and John Kasich; Republicans running on experience and telling-it-like-it-is to hard-right voters.
New Hampshire State Senator Andy Sanborn
“No question, [Pataki] splits the moderate vote,” said New Hampshire State Senator Andy Sanborn, an early endorser of Paul. “Three months ago, we talked about the easy path for Jeb, as it appeared he would be the only moderate in the race. Now, not only does Jeb have Christie, Pataki, Kasich to split that demographic, but as you see, Rubio is also moderating. In the end, this, plus the pro-war stance all other candidates have taken has put Rand in a singular space. A great place to be, especially in light of the poll today, showing he is one of the leaders in a match-up with Clinton.”
Under the bunch-up theory of the primary, Paul could win with perhaps a quarter of the vote, or the 23 percent that his father won in the 2012 primary, when he formed a kind of accord with a dominant Mitt Romney. Current polling has Rand Paul both weaker and better-positioned than the old man. In the RealClearPolitics average, Paul’s 12.3 percent put him just 2.4 points behind Jeb Bush, the weakest New Hampshire “frontrunner” in ages. That average gave Christie just five percent of the vote, Kasich just one percent, and Pataki nothing. What happens if Christie and Pataki put down stakes in New Hampshire? The Huntsman/Lieberman example suggests that they lose, but by taking chunks out of the frontrunner.
It’s a solid theory, especially at a time when Paul is accentuating the foreign policy gap between himself and the rest of the GOP field. The long-term problem is that the media doesn’t necessarily drop laurels on the winner of a tight New Hampshire primary. In 1996, Pat Buchanan’s “peasants with pitchforks” campaign drove right through the pack of Bob Dole, Lamar Alexander, Steve Forbes, and Richard Lugar. He won by less than 2,000 votes. It was the apex of his campaign.
More...http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-05-29/rand-paul-s-secret-weapon-is-george-pataki
Topic: GOP - Rand Paul's Presidential Highlight Reel w/ his Libertarian Twist - page 35. (Read 205816 times)
May 30, 2015, 08:28:00 PM
May 30, 2015, 08:18:12 PM
The surveillance framework of Patriot Acts I and II have never captured a terrorist nor exposed/prevented a terrorist plot. They have been very successful spying on Americans and foreigners.
People who support illegal laws to circumvent the Constitution are the real terrorists.
I also suggest that when this law goes bye bye the NSA will not stop. They don't really give a damn about the Constitution. They will just hide their illegal activities and throw the occasional employee under the bus when they get caught.
Indeed, the FBI has said as much that this bulk data collection hasn't helped them catch a single terrorist so with that being said, I don't se how any politician can say these extra powers are important unless they're hellbent on erasing privacy from American in general. People who support illegal laws to circumvent the Constitution are the real terrorists.
I also suggest that when this law goes bye bye the NSA will not stop. They don't really give a damn about the Constitution. They will just hide their illegal activities and throw the occasional employee under the bus when they get caught.
The NSA can conceivably keep going on despite saying they're winding things down at the moment. However, getting Rand to be president could make sure this is over with. But, the acknowledgement of the NSA not spying in this fashion anymore keeps them from doing any law enforcement missions to use this data against anyone.
May 30, 2015, 08:14:30 PM
On Lindsey Graham's Turf, Rand Paul Begins Patriot Act Endgame
“Anybody here love liberty?” asked Rand Paul, eliciting a lusty cheer from around the bar.
At least 200 people in Greenville, S.C. had crammed into Friday's edition of “Pints for Liberty,” billed as a “free market happy hour” that had never before had a presidential candidate stop by. It had taken the Kentucky senator 10 minutes to work past the bar, through fans wearing T-shirts with his face on them, onto a stage where he could rally against the U.S. spying programs.
Paul continued his call-and-response: “Anybody here love their privacy? Anybody think the Patriot Act ought to go?”
“I'm gonna do anything and everything to make the Patriot Act go away.”
More cheering filled the room. One Paul fan waved a homemade sign, reading “The NSA should protect us, not hack us.”
“We will have a debate Sunday night,” said Paul, casting ahead to Sunday's unusual session in the U.S. Senate planned to debate the surveillance programs hours before they are due to expire. “It is uncertain what the outcome will be, but I can tell you for sure what my position will be. I'm gonna do anything and everything to make the Patriot Act go away.”
Saturday, in a statement, Paul laid out his rationale for blocking the renewal of the 2001 anti-spying law. Not just reforming it—killing it. “I will force the expiration of the NSA illegal spy program,” Paul promised reporters. “Sometimes when the problem is big enough, you just have to start over.” Hours later, he sent a version of that statement to his donor list, subject: “I'm forcing the Patriot Act to expire.”
Paul, elected to the Senate nine years after the passage of the law, billed as a way to protect the homeland from terrorist threats, has never bothered to hide his contempt for it. In 2011 he dismissed the law as something “enacted in such haste after 9/11,” and thus ripe for scrutiny. Before his marathon Senate floor speech to delay the renewal, he called the statute “the most unpatriotic of acts.”
On Friday, in South Carolina, he found a Republican electorate that had caught up with him. Paul barnstormed four locations across the upstate, an area that bleeds red in presidential elections and sends Representative Trey Gowdy and Representative Mick Mulvaney to Washington. He ended the day just 30 minutes from Central, S.C., where Senator Lindsey Graham was born and raised, and where, on Monday, the man who literally rolled his eyes when Paul spoke would announce his own presidential campaign.
At every stop, Paul spent at least half of his time attacking the Patriot Act. Twice, he lightly chided the media for assuming that the hawkish Republicans of South Carolina would be put off by talk like that.
“Don't be surprised that people in Washington don't get it,” Paul said at a Republican lunch and book signing in Rock Hill. “They're about a decade behind and a dollar short. They don't understand what's going on in America, because they don't visit us enough. If you get outside the beltway of Washington, you'll find that the vast majority of people want some protections.” If Republicans want to win in states like Illinois, Pennsylvania, and Colorado—all won handily by President Barack Obama in 2012—“we need to be the party of the entire Bill of Rights,” Paul said.
More...http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-05-30/on-lindsey-graham-s-turf-rand-paul-begins-patriot-act-endgame
“Anybody here love liberty?” asked Rand Paul, eliciting a lusty cheer from around the bar.
At least 200 people in Greenville, S.C. had crammed into Friday's edition of “Pints for Liberty,” billed as a “free market happy hour” that had never before had a presidential candidate stop by. It had taken the Kentucky senator 10 minutes to work past the bar, through fans wearing T-shirts with his face on them, onto a stage where he could rally against the U.S. spying programs.
Paul continued his call-and-response: “Anybody here love their privacy? Anybody think the Patriot Act ought to go?”
“I'm gonna do anything and everything to make the Patriot Act go away.”
More cheering filled the room. One Paul fan waved a homemade sign, reading “The NSA should protect us, not hack us.”
“We will have a debate Sunday night,” said Paul, casting ahead to Sunday's unusual session in the U.S. Senate planned to debate the surveillance programs hours before they are due to expire. “It is uncertain what the outcome will be, but I can tell you for sure what my position will be. I'm gonna do anything and everything to make the Patriot Act go away.”
Saturday, in a statement, Paul laid out his rationale for blocking the renewal of the 2001 anti-spying law. Not just reforming it—killing it. “I will force the expiration of the NSA illegal spy program,” Paul promised reporters. “Sometimes when the problem is big enough, you just have to start over.” Hours later, he sent a version of that statement to his donor list, subject: “I'm forcing the Patriot Act to expire.”
Paul, elected to the Senate nine years after the passage of the law, billed as a way to protect the homeland from terrorist threats, has never bothered to hide his contempt for it. In 2011 he dismissed the law as something “enacted in such haste after 9/11,” and thus ripe for scrutiny. Before his marathon Senate floor speech to delay the renewal, he called the statute “the most unpatriotic of acts.”
On Friday, in South Carolina, he found a Republican electorate that had caught up with him. Paul barnstormed four locations across the upstate, an area that bleeds red in presidential elections and sends Representative Trey Gowdy and Representative Mick Mulvaney to Washington. He ended the day just 30 minutes from Central, S.C., where Senator Lindsey Graham was born and raised, and where, on Monday, the man who literally rolled his eyes when Paul spoke would announce his own presidential campaign.
At every stop, Paul spent at least half of his time attacking the Patriot Act. Twice, he lightly chided the media for assuming that the hawkish Republicans of South Carolina would be put off by talk like that.
“Don't be surprised that people in Washington don't get it,” Paul said at a Republican lunch and book signing in Rock Hill. “They're about a decade behind and a dollar short. They don't understand what's going on in America, because they don't visit us enough. If you get outside the beltway of Washington, you'll find that the vast majority of people want some protections.” If Republicans want to win in states like Illinois, Pennsylvania, and Colorado—all won handily by President Barack Obama in 2012—“we need to be the party of the entire Bill of Rights,” Paul said.
More...http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-05-30/on-lindsey-graham-s-turf-rand-paul-begins-patriot-act-endgame
May 30, 2015, 08:11:12 PM
The surveillance framework of Patriot Acts I and II have never captured a terrorist nor exposed/prevented a terrorist plot. They have been very successful spying on Americans and foreigners.
People who support illegal laws to circumvent the Constitution are the real terrorists.
I also suggest that when this law goes bye bye the NSA will not stop. They don't really give a damn about the Constitution. They will just hide their illegal activities and throw the occasional employee under the bus when they get caught.
People who support illegal laws to circumvent the Constitution are the real terrorists.
I also suggest that when this law goes bye bye the NSA will not stop. They don't really give a damn about the Constitution. They will just hide their illegal activities and throw the occasional employee under the bus when they get caught.
May 30, 2015, 08:04:10 PM
The Patriot Act May Be Dead Forever
The most controversial elements of the spying bill may never be coming back, lawmakers from both parties tell The Daily Beast. Here’s why.
Barring any last-minute compromises, powerful government surveillance authorities under the Patriot Act will expire at the stroke of midnight Monday. And they may never return.
This week, senators have been negotiating over whether to pass a House bill that would renew and tweak existing provisions in the long-controversial law, rather than let them “sunset” on June 1. But if the sunset comes and the provisions are off the books, lawmakers in both chambers would be facing a vote to reinstate controversial surveillance authorities, which is an entirely different political calculation.
Lawmakers may be unwilling to vote affirmatively for surveillance powers that many of them already dislike and have tried to rein in. “I think it is a real risk that if the provisions do expire, they would be more difficult to reinstate than to reform,” Representative Adam Schiff, the senior Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, told The Daily Beast.
Schiff supports the USA Freedom Act, which overwhelmingly passed the House but failed to muster enough votes in a midnight Senate session last Saturday. The bill would end the NSA’s collection of phone records in bulk, but leave intact other surveillance tools that, while not broadly popular, are less controversial.
Schiff said it was easier to get lawmakers to support the Freedom Act with its changes to existing law than it would be to vote to re-enact law that had gone away.
Senator Mike Lee, who also supports the Freedom Act, shared that sentiment. “There were members who voted for the USA Freedom Act who would feel differently about reinstating those provisions” once they’ve lapsed, Lee told The Daily Beast. Lee said he was talking to colleagues this week to try to persuade them to support the bill before the clock runs out.
The political stakes for Congress are high, and novel. Asking members to reinstate the provisions would be akin to asking them to cast a new vote in favor of the Patriot Act, and that’s something that two-thirds of House members have never done in their legislative careers, said Harley Geiger, the advocacy director and senior counsel at the Center for Democracy & Technology. “If the provisions sunset, we enter uncharted waters, and I don’t really know what happens,” Geiger told The Daily Beast.
While lawmakers could once be counted on to reliably reauthorize the Patriot Act—and accuse opponents of risking national security if they failed to do so—leaks by Edward Snowden about spying operations have eroded the law’s support. In the House, USA Freedom was pitched as a compromise that would suspend the phone records program while leaving intact other measures that intelligence agencies say they need. The bill has enjoyed support among some privacy and civil liberties advocates.
The Senate will return on Sunday to make one last try to pass it. But if they fail, there’s no obvious way forward in either chamber. “The only way out of this box,” Schiff said, was for the Senate to pass the House bill.
“There were members who voted for the USA Freedom Act who would feel differently about reinstating those provisions” once they’ve lapsed, the senator said.
Three major Patriot provisions are on the chopping block: so-called roving wiretaps, which let the government monitor one person’s multiple electronic devices; the “lone-wolf” provision, which allows surveillance of someone who’s not connected to a known terrorist group; and Section 215, which, among other things, the government uses to collect the records of all landline phone calls in the United States.
House lawmakers say they’re in no mood to bail the Senate out if it once again can’t muster the votes needed to head off a possible filibuster by surveillance opponents, most notably Senator Rand Paul and his allies, including Ted Cruz. Both men are running for president.
More...http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/05/28/the-patriot-act-may-be-dead-for-good.html
The most controversial elements of the spying bill may never be coming back, lawmakers from both parties tell The Daily Beast. Here’s why.
Barring any last-minute compromises, powerful government surveillance authorities under the Patriot Act will expire at the stroke of midnight Monday. And they may never return.
This week, senators have been negotiating over whether to pass a House bill that would renew and tweak existing provisions in the long-controversial law, rather than let them “sunset” on June 1. But if the sunset comes and the provisions are off the books, lawmakers in both chambers would be facing a vote to reinstate controversial surveillance authorities, which is an entirely different political calculation.
Lawmakers may be unwilling to vote affirmatively for surveillance powers that many of them already dislike and have tried to rein in. “I think it is a real risk that if the provisions do expire, they would be more difficult to reinstate than to reform,” Representative Adam Schiff, the senior Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, told The Daily Beast.
Schiff supports the USA Freedom Act, which overwhelmingly passed the House but failed to muster enough votes in a midnight Senate session last Saturday. The bill would end the NSA’s collection of phone records in bulk, but leave intact other surveillance tools that, while not broadly popular, are less controversial.
Schiff said it was easier to get lawmakers to support the Freedom Act with its changes to existing law than it would be to vote to re-enact law that had gone away.
Senator Mike Lee, who also supports the Freedom Act, shared that sentiment. “There were members who voted for the USA Freedom Act who would feel differently about reinstating those provisions” once they’ve lapsed, Lee told The Daily Beast. Lee said he was talking to colleagues this week to try to persuade them to support the bill before the clock runs out.
The political stakes for Congress are high, and novel. Asking members to reinstate the provisions would be akin to asking them to cast a new vote in favor of the Patriot Act, and that’s something that two-thirds of House members have never done in their legislative careers, said Harley Geiger, the advocacy director and senior counsel at the Center for Democracy & Technology. “If the provisions sunset, we enter uncharted waters, and I don’t really know what happens,” Geiger told The Daily Beast.
While lawmakers could once be counted on to reliably reauthorize the Patriot Act—and accuse opponents of risking national security if they failed to do so—leaks by Edward Snowden about spying operations have eroded the law’s support. In the House, USA Freedom was pitched as a compromise that would suspend the phone records program while leaving intact other measures that intelligence agencies say they need. The bill has enjoyed support among some privacy and civil liberties advocates.
The Senate will return on Sunday to make one last try to pass it. But if they fail, there’s no obvious way forward in either chamber. “The only way out of this box,” Schiff said, was for the Senate to pass the House bill.
“There were members who voted for the USA Freedom Act who would feel differently about reinstating those provisions” once they’ve lapsed, the senator said.
Three major Patriot provisions are on the chopping block: so-called roving wiretaps, which let the government monitor one person’s multiple electronic devices; the “lone-wolf” provision, which allows surveillance of someone who’s not connected to a known terrorist group; and Section 215, which, among other things, the government uses to collect the records of all landline phone calls in the United States.
House lawmakers say they’re in no mood to bail the Senate out if it once again can’t muster the votes needed to head off a possible filibuster by surveillance opponents, most notably Senator Rand Paul and his allies, including Ted Cruz. Both men are running for president.
More...http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/05/28/the-patriot-act-may-be-dead-for-good.html
May 30, 2015, 07:55:14 PM
Rand Against the Machine: Chris Hayes (MSNBC) reports on Fox News bias and Paul's Patriot Act battle
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EyfJOsES9PI
Pretty good watch
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EyfJOsES9PI
Pretty good watch
May 30, 2015, 07:42:43 PM
Des Moines (IA) Register poll; Paul in 2nd
Paul bests the field in attracting moderate Republicans, independents who intend to attend the Republican caucuses (21 percent, all but double any other contender), and likely GOP caucusgoers who are under 45. Paul, who has said the GOP "can have people on both sides" of the same-sex marriage issue, has inherited many of the liberty movement conservatives who supported his father, then-Texas U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, in his Iowa caucus races in 2008 and 2012.
But Rand Paul has seen his favorability rating in the poll drop by 9 percentage points since January, more than for any other GOP contender.
"Paul is slightly worse off, which tells me that his efforts to woo his father's supporters have hurt him with typical GOP voters," said Katie Packer, a Washington, D.C.-based GOP strategist who worked for Mitt Romney's 2012 presidential campaign.
Walker 17
Paul 10
Carson 10
Bush 9
Huckabee 9
Rubio 6
Santorum 6
Cruz 5
Trump 4
Christie 4
Perry 3
Kasich 2
Fiorina 2
Jindal 1
Graham 1
Paul bests the field in attracting moderate Republicans, independents who intend to attend the Republican caucuses (21 percent, all but double any other contender), and likely GOP caucusgoers who are under 45. Paul, who has said the GOP "can have people on both sides" of the same-sex marriage issue, has inherited many of the liberty movement conservatives who supported his father, then-Texas U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, in his Iowa caucus races in 2008 and 2012.
But Rand Paul has seen his favorability rating in the poll drop by 9 percentage points since January, more than for any other GOP contender.
"Paul is slightly worse off, which tells me that his efforts to woo his father's supporters have hurt him with typical GOP voters," said Katie Packer, a Washington, D.C.-based GOP strategist who worked for Mitt Romney's 2012 presidential campaign.
Walker 17
Paul 10
Carson 10
Bush 9
Huckabee 9
Rubio 6
Santorum 6
Cruz 5
Trump 4
Christie 4
Perry 3
Kasich 2
Fiorina 2
Jindal 1
Graham 1
May 30, 2015, 07:30:42 PM
Read Rand Paul's Statement on NSA Spying
I have fought for several years now to end the illegal spying of the NSA on ordinary Americans. The callous use of general warrants and the disregard for the Bill of Rights must end. Forcing us to choose between our rights and our safety is a false choice and we are better than that as a nation and as a people.
That's why two years ago, I sued the NSA. It's why I proposed the Fourth Amendment Protection Act. It's why I have been seeking for months to have a full, open and honest debate on this issue-- a debate that never came.
So last week, seeing proponents of this illegal spying rushing toward a deadline to wholesale renew this unconstitutional power, I filibustered the bill. I spoke for over 10 hours to call attention to the vast expansion of the spy state and the corresponding erosion of our liberties.
Then, last week, I further blocked the extension of these powers and the Senate adjourned for recess rather than stay and debate them.
Tomorrow, we will come back with just hours left before the NSA illegal spying powers expire.
Let me be clear: I acknowledge the need for a robust intelligence agency and for a vigilant national security.
I believe we must fight terrorism, and I believe we must stand strong against our enemies.
But we do not need to give up who we are to defeat them. In fact, we must not.
There has to be another way. We must find it together.
So tomorrow, I will force the expiration of the NSA illegal spy program.
I am ready and willing to start the debate on how we fight terrorism without giving up our liberty.
Sometimes when the problem is big enough, you just have to start over. The tax code and our regulatory burdens are two good examples.
Fighting against unconditional, illegal powers that take away our rights, taken by previous Congresses and administrations is just as important.
I do not do this to obstruct. I do it to build something better, more effective, more lasting, and more cognizant of who we are as Americans.
http://randpaul.com/news/rand-pauls-statement-on-nsa-spying
I have fought for several years now to end the illegal spying of the NSA on ordinary Americans. The callous use of general warrants and the disregard for the Bill of Rights must end. Forcing us to choose between our rights and our safety is a false choice and we are better than that as a nation and as a people.
That's why two years ago, I sued the NSA. It's why I proposed the Fourth Amendment Protection Act. It's why I have been seeking for months to have a full, open and honest debate on this issue-- a debate that never came.
So last week, seeing proponents of this illegal spying rushing toward a deadline to wholesale renew this unconstitutional power, I filibustered the bill. I spoke for over 10 hours to call attention to the vast expansion of the spy state and the corresponding erosion of our liberties.
Then, last week, I further blocked the extension of these powers and the Senate adjourned for recess rather than stay and debate them.
Tomorrow, we will come back with just hours left before the NSA illegal spying powers expire.
Let me be clear: I acknowledge the need for a robust intelligence agency and for a vigilant national security.
I believe we must fight terrorism, and I believe we must stand strong against our enemies.
But we do not need to give up who we are to defeat them. In fact, we must not.
There has to be another way. We must find it together.
So tomorrow, I will force the expiration of the NSA illegal spy program.
I am ready and willing to start the debate on how we fight terrorism without giving up our liberty.
Sometimes when the problem is big enough, you just have to start over. The tax code and our regulatory burdens are two good examples.
Fighting against unconditional, illegal powers that take away our rights, taken by previous Congresses and administrations is just as important.
I do not do this to obstruct. I do it to build something better, more effective, more lasting, and more cognizant of who we are as Americans.
http://randpaul.com/news/rand-pauls-statement-on-nsa-spying
May 30, 2015, 07:29:42 PM
Exclusive: Rand Paul: 'I will force the expiration' of the PATRIOT Act
Rand Paul plans to force the expiration of the PATRIOT Act Sunday by refusing to allow Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to expedite debate on a key surveillance bill.
In a statement to POLITICO Saturday, Paul warned that he would not consent to any efforts to pass either an extension of current law or the USA Freedom Act, a reform bill passed overwhelmingly by the House earlier this month.
“So tomorrow, I will force the expiration of the NSA illegal spy program,” Paul said.
Because of the nature of the Senate rules, Paul can force the expiration of the PATRIOT Act, which he has vowed on the campaign trail to repeal as president because he contends it invades Americans’ privacy rights.
In a rare Sunday session, McConnell, sources said, appears likely to move the USA Freedom Act, despite his opposition to how the bill overhauls the National Security Agency’s bulk data collection program. That’s because McConnell has little other choice given the vast support within Congress for the bill.
...
More...http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/exclusive-rand-paul-i-will-force-the-expiration-of-the-patriot-act-118443.html
Rand Paul plans to force the expiration of the PATRIOT Act Sunday by refusing to allow Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to expedite debate on a key surveillance bill.
In a statement to POLITICO Saturday, Paul warned that he would not consent to any efforts to pass either an extension of current law or the USA Freedom Act, a reform bill passed overwhelmingly by the House earlier this month.
“So tomorrow, I will force the expiration of the NSA illegal spy program,” Paul said.
Because of the nature of the Senate rules, Paul can force the expiration of the PATRIOT Act, which he has vowed on the campaign trail to repeal as president because he contends it invades Americans’ privacy rights.
In a rare Sunday session, McConnell, sources said, appears likely to move the USA Freedom Act, despite his opposition to how the bill overhauls the National Security Agency’s bulk data collection program. That’s because McConnell has little other choice given the vast support within Congress for the bill.
...
More...http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/exclusive-rand-paul-i-will-force-the-expiration-of-the-patriot-act-118443.html
May 30, 2015, 01:31:58 AM
"Only way Patriot Act to be saved in time is for establishment to cut a deal with Rand"
"To put it bluntly, if Senate leaders and the White House want to get the USA Freedom Act to the president’s desk before the Patriot Act authorities expire at midnight Sunday, there’s only one route under the rules: cut a deal with Paul."
Here are the technical details on the Senate procedure for Sunday:
http://blogs.rollcall.com/wgdb/rand-paul-can-easily-force-patriot-act-to-expire/?dcz
"To put it bluntly, if Senate leaders and the White House want to get the USA Freedom Act to the president’s desk before the Patriot Act authorities expire at midnight Sunday, there’s only one route under the rules: cut a deal with Paul."
Here are the technical details on the Senate procedure for Sunday:
http://blogs.rollcall.com/wgdb/rand-paul-can-easily-force-patriot-act-to-expire/?dcz
May 30, 2015, 12:54:54 AM
Peep this out. The drive time host in Chicago (on a heavy AM station) just went nuclear against neocons for Rand Paul today.
Joe Walsh on ISIS: "Rand Paul is Right. The GOP Hawks Created ISIS"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=116&v=uzx1DrvoINo
~10 mins
Joe Walsh on ISIS: "Rand Paul is Right. The GOP Hawks Created ISIS"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=116&v=uzx1DrvoINo
~10 mins
May 30, 2015, 12:41:58 AM
Rand Paul gets high marks from pro-marijuana groups
WASHINGTON D.C. - The 2016 presidential campaign field is already 10 contenders deep, and though it may double in the coming months, marijuana activists and pro-legalization lobbyists already see a clear winner: Rand Paul.
“I think a lot of these guys talk the talk but the only person who has so far walked the walk is Rand Paul,” said Marijuana Policy Project Director Dan Riffle.
Paul, a first term Republican senator from Kentucky, has been a champion of marijuana law reform practically from the beginning of his career. During his time in office, he’s captured the hearts of a diverse group of voters: isolationists, young voters disenchanted with the Republican Party, and now, the pro-cannabis community.
“We’ve got Rand Paul, who is very clear in saying he thinks the war on drugs is a failure, that states should be able to implement marijuana laws,” said Tom Angell, founder of Marijuana Majority. “Where most of the candidates are with us in terms of saying the right things, Rand Paul is actually taking meaningful action to make it happen.”
...
http://www.newsnet5.com/decodedc/rand-paul-gets-high-marks-from-pro-marijuana-groups
WASHINGTON D.C. - The 2016 presidential campaign field is already 10 contenders deep, and though it may double in the coming months, marijuana activists and pro-legalization lobbyists already see a clear winner: Rand Paul.
“I think a lot of these guys talk the talk but the only person who has so far walked the walk is Rand Paul,” said Marijuana Policy Project Director Dan Riffle.
Paul, a first term Republican senator from Kentucky, has been a champion of marijuana law reform practically from the beginning of his career. During his time in office, he’s captured the hearts of a diverse group of voters: isolationists, young voters disenchanted with the Republican Party, and now, the pro-cannabis community.
“We’ve got Rand Paul, who is very clear in saying he thinks the war on drugs is a failure, that states should be able to implement marijuana laws,” said Tom Angell, founder of Marijuana Majority. “Where most of the candidates are with us in terms of saying the right things, Rand Paul is actually taking meaningful action to make it happen.”
...
http://www.newsnet5.com/decodedc/rand-paul-gets-high-marks-from-pro-marijuana-groups
May 30, 2015, 12:39:17 AM
[Video] Rand Paul on Hardball w/ Chris Matthews MSNBC 5/29/15
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXln9GbqDQs
Matthews calls Rand the only republican game in town. Great interview ~15mins that I'm sure all of you could appreciate.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXln9GbqDQs
Matthews calls Rand the only republican game in town. Great interview ~15mins that I'm sure all of you could appreciate.
May 30, 2015, 12:13:01 AM
One GOP 2016 Candidate (Rand) Has Really Drawn Krauthammer’s (Fox's showcase neocon) Ire: His ‘Ignorance Really Astonishes Me’
Conservative political pundit Charles Krauthammer ripped into Republican presidential candidate Rand Paul Friday over recent comments the Kentucky senator made on the Islamic State.
“Sometimes Ron Paul’s ignorance really astonishes me,” Krauthammer told radio host Hugh Hewitt, before clarifying that he was referring to Rand Paul.
Paul drew controversy this week after he said that “hawks” in the Republican Party had been responsible for the rise of the Islamic State.
Krauthammer adamantly disagreed, listing several reasons he thought the senator was wrong.
More and check out the video exchange, also the comments below...http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/05/29/one-gop-2016-candidate-has-really-drawn-krauthammers-ire-his-ignorance-really-astonishes-me/#comment-9273432
Conservative political pundit Charles Krauthammer ripped into Republican presidential candidate Rand Paul Friday over recent comments the Kentucky senator made on the Islamic State.
“Sometimes Ron Paul’s ignorance really astonishes me,” Krauthammer told radio host Hugh Hewitt, before clarifying that he was referring to Rand Paul.
Paul drew controversy this week after he said that “hawks” in the Republican Party had been responsible for the rise of the Islamic State.
Krauthammer adamantly disagreed, listing several reasons he thought the senator was wrong.
More and check out the video exchange, also the comments below...http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/05/29/one-gop-2016-candidate-has-really-drawn-krauthammers-ire-his-ignorance-really-astonishes-me/#comment-9273432
May 30, 2015, 12:05:29 AM
What are uncle Huckabee's numbers like today after supporting a sex predator?
First of all, I wouldn't call the Duggar dude a sex predator like I would Bill Clinton but the social conservatives tend to stick with their guys (Huck) unless it's really egregious. That said, Huck isn't getting much press w/ Rand getting all the attention and lashing out by fellow GOPers cause of his comments blaming ISIS on the war hawks in his party. Huck ain't going anywhere in this race and is no threat to the nomination besides being a pesky thorn in early Iowa. The republican establishment is lining up behind Bush, Rubio and Walker (of top tier candidates) and the rest are viewed as anti or off-establishment types who are there to crowd out the only real anti-establishment dude in Rand Paul. 
May 29, 2015, 09:17:18 PM
What are uncle Huckabee's numbers like today after supporting a sex predator?
May 29, 2015, 09:05:45 PM
Nice, politico even picked it up.Fox News' poll coverage omits Rand Paul
Since Rand Paul launched his bid for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination, he has consistently finished between third and sixth place in polls that include as many as 19 GOP contenders.
Yet when Fox News reports on those polls, the Kentucky senator is at times nowhere to be found. For instance: A Quinnipiac poll released Thursday had Paul in sixth. But when Fox News ran an image of ten candidates under the banner, "If The Republican Primary Were Held Today," based on that poll, Paul's name and visage were missing.
Rare's Nick Morpus notes that Fox News similarly omitted Paul from an in-house poll it ran two weeks ago, measuring how Republican hopefuls would fare against Hillary Clinton. Paul's name just wasn't there. Never mind that two weeks prior to that, Fox News did include Paul's name in a survey that showed him polling highest against Hillary.
UPDATE (7:15 p.m.): A Fox News spokesperson told the On Media blog that the omission was nothing more than a “program error."
http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2015/05/fox-news-poll-coverage-omits-rand-paul-207928.html
May 29, 2015, 09:02:46 PM
Chris Matthews can occasionally be a decent guy. His delivery/attitude is sometimes annoying, but overall he is far from being the worst person on TV.
May 29, 2015, 08:59:20 PM
They really don't explain anything other than to say it was a "program error", but it's interesting that this story is starting to gain some steam with Mediaite now picking it up. I wonder if Fox News will pull these shenanigans again anytime soon, now that it is starting to attract attention.
Fox News Explains Why Rand Paul Was Left Out of 2016 Poll Graphic
A funny thing happened on Thursday morning when Fox & Friends presented the results of the most recent Quinnipiac poll that found five Republican presidential candidates tied for first place with 10% each. Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), who finished sixth on the list with 7%, was no where to be found:
...
And apparently, this is not the first time Fox has left Paul out of it’s polling coverage. Earlier this month, Fox placed Paul’s name at the bottom and Jeb Bush’s name at the top of a graphic that showed how candidates are fairing against Hillary Clinton, despite the fact that Paul was the leader. Then, the following week, Fox left Paul out of its internal poll completely, which once again showed Bush in the lead.
Mediaite reached out to a Fox News representative who explained the Fox & Friends omission was nothing more than a “program error.” Also, Sen. Paul appeared on Fox & Friends May 26th.
More...http://www.mediaite.com/tv/fox-news-explains-why-rand-paul-was-left-out-of-2016-poll-graphic/
Fox News Explains Why Rand Paul Was Left Out of 2016 Poll Graphic
A funny thing happened on Thursday morning when Fox & Friends presented the results of the most recent Quinnipiac poll that found five Republican presidential candidates tied for first place with 10% each. Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), who finished sixth on the list with 7%, was no where to be found:
...
And apparently, this is not the first time Fox has left Paul out of it’s polling coverage. Earlier this month, Fox placed Paul’s name at the bottom and Jeb Bush’s name at the top of a graphic that showed how candidates are fairing against Hillary Clinton, despite the fact that Paul was the leader. Then, the following week, Fox left Paul out of its internal poll completely, which once again showed Bush in the lead.
Mediaite reached out to a Fox News representative who explained the Fox & Friends omission was nothing more than a “program error.” Also, Sen. Paul appeared on Fox & Friends May 26th.
More...http://www.mediaite.com/tv/fox-news-explains-why-rand-paul-was-left-out-of-2016-poll-graphic/
May 29, 2015, 07:43:28 PM
Jump to: