Rand Paul steps up.

[Germanicus]

I thought the response that Rand Paul gave was pretty good.

Rand Paul just made himself the big dog of the Republican Party.

I think Rubio is a limited gimmick. Christie is too fat and looks like a DC supervillian. He should get off the beach himself. Paul Ryan is done. The latino Bush is not ready.

Rand Paul is the best the Republican Party has got.

He needs to distance himself from the lunatics that cheered for his father and show that he can represent a wider group. I think his response to Obama on Syria will go a long way for Paul establishing himself as the clear leader of the Republican Party.

What did you guys think of his response? As a non-American I thought it was ok.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/10/transcript-sen-rand-paul-responds-to-president-obama-syria-address/

[GrassrootsConservative]

Both Rand and Ron have always been people I've admired politically.

[Ravi]

I stopped at reading "obama wants us to be allies with AQ." Is it possible for a Republican to open his mouth without lying? What a sad state of affairs that this little shit gets any respect from the GOP.

[midcan5]

If nonsense paid .... hold on, in the American house of representatives and in our senate nonsense does pay well. As someone noted above as soon as one says something downright stupid why read further. Paul and other idiots like him, say the most ridiculous nonsense and the partisans listen like children. More rhetorical nonsense from a group of people who feed on the teat of government as they do absolutely nothing for the American people.

http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/16449-Sen-Rand-Paul-Kentucky-will-deliver-response-to-President-Obama-s-speech-on-Syria?p=363943&viewfull=1#post363943

[jillian]

I stopped at reading "obama wants us to be allies with AQ." Is it possible for a Republican to open his mouth without lying? What a sad state of affairs that this little shit gets any respect from the GOP.

they don't care what their "leaders" say... so long as they throw red meat to the base.

[Mainecoons]

I know it's hard but see if you three geniuses can connect the dots. We now know for certain that the Syrian rebellion has been co-opted by AQ. Ergo, if we attack their enemy, the Syrian regime, we become their de facto allies.

Dooh!

[Germanicus]

3927

Yeah.

And dont you guys think Marie Harf is much better than Jay Carney? I would rather Harf try to convince me. Carney is a little weasel. I kinda like Marie Harf.

3928

3929

[Cigar]

I'd never thought I'd see the day; that Republicans would shy away from War ...
Thank You Thank You Thank You ... President Barack Hussein Obama
Thank You Thank You Thank You ... President George W Bush:applause:

"I'm tired of the eye-rolling and the easy nit-picking of the president's leadership on this over the last few weeks. The truth is: his threat of war galvanized the world and America, raised the profile of the issue of chemical weapons more powerfully than ever before, ensured that this atrocity would not be easily ignored and fostered a diplomatic initiative to resolve the issue without use of arms."

Yes, it’s been messy. A more cautious president would have ducked it. Knowing full well it could scramble his presidency, Obama nonetheless believed that stopping chemical weapons use is worth it – for the long run, and for Americans as well as Syrians. Putin understands this as well. Those chemical weapons, if uncontrolled, could easily slip into the hands of rebels whose second target, after Assad and the Alawites and the Christians, would be Russia.

This emphatically does not solve the Syria implosion. But Obama has never promised to.

What it does offer is a nonviolent way toward taking the chemical weapons issue off the table. Just because we cannot solve everything does not mean we cannot solve something. And the core truth is that without Obama’s willingness to go out on a precarious limb, we would not have that opportunity.

http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2013/09/10/the-president-makes-the-case/

[Germanicus]

I think the US public are the heros of the day.

The US Public stopped a war.

Fuck yeah!

[Cigar]

I think the US public are the heros of the day.

The US Public stopped a war.

Fuck yeah!

They learned a valuable lesson ... you can't fight your way out of everything.

[Mainecoons]

Obama speech fails AP fact check.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_UNITED_STATES_SYRIA_FACT_CHECK?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-09-11-03-03-47

[Germanicus]

And how smooth is Kinzinger?

3930

3931

That guy is actually pretty scary. He looks like he gets what he wants. He seems like he is kind of a war wonger.

[Cigar]

GOAL: Syria to no longer use or warehouse Chemical Weapons
BONUS: Syria Signs with CWC
HUGE BONUS: Achieve all of the above with ZERO US conflict

Everything else is Political Bull Shit :grin:

[Germanicus]

Both Rand and Ron have always been people I've admired politically.

I kinda liked Ron Paul too but only because I am not American. I like his Foreign Policy ideas. I did not agree at all with his Domestic Policy but then again, it couldnt be worse than Obama. I am socialist so I am against privatizing everything. But he would have stayed out of Syria all together and he would have saved Americans a heap of cash byy bringing home troops from all corners of the globe by now in my opinion. I think he would have done things to restore confidence in the USA and things that would have helped world peace.

I think at the end of the day world peace is more important than what happens in the Middle East. Israel is safer without an all out world war type situation breaking out around them. The important thing is the two superpowers getting along and cooperating. That doesnt mean they cant compete but USA and China need to be friends. The US empre has reached its limits.

The US has a heap of energy it has been sitting on I guess incase of war but a modern war will not be so long. There is no reason to sit on the energy. It will become obsolete before it can be used. There is no need for the US to waste money in the Middle East. The "Zero option" for Afghanistan is a great idea. So is bringing home the troops from places like Australia and South Korea and Japan and all the other places that have US military bases and stationed troops.

I think Ron Paulls foreign policy that people called isolationist is the only good option for the USA. America are seen as Neo-Colonialists.

Ron Paul also wanted to stop funding the IMF and stop 'foreign aid'. He would have saved a heap of taxpayer money and helped the international image of the USA.

I think his base was the real problem. And I think the base that Rand Paul inherited is actually a bad thing in most ways. Rand Paul needs to appeal to a wider group than Ron did.

America doesnt need to have such a huge military to remain important. The USA is a huge region and Americans are productive and innovative. bringing home the troops is not isolationist.

But yeah, Im not saying you are a lunatic. I like Ron Paul too. (:


American taxpayers already lend various governments more than $5 billion annually through the IMF, at a yearly cost of over $300 million because of loan defaults and subsidized interest rates. Now the IMF wants to double its pool of funding, which will put taxpayers on the hook for $12 billion in loans at a cost of about $750 million each year. Furthermore, since the IMF creates “drawing rights” accounts that are redeemable in US dollars, it in essence prints US dollars when it increases those drawing rights. This is a clear violation of our national sovereignty, and a vivid example of why we should stop participating in international schemes like the IMF altogether.

The IMF and other complex schemes only serve to obscure the real issue: Why should US taxpayers be forced to send money abroad? Certainly the Constitution provides no authority for foreign aid.
http://www.la.org.au/opinion/120510/imf-con

[Chris]

I know it's hard but see if you three geniuses can connect the dots. We now know for certain that the Syrian rebellion has been co-opted by AQ. Ergo, if we attack their enemy, the Syrian regime, we become their de facto allies.

Dooh!



You're asking too much, you're asking some to get past their emotions and deal with this, with anything, rationally.

[Chris]

Germanicus, I'm surprised, in a good way, at your reaction. I mean you're pretty much a state socialist and Rand is pretty much a libertarian, opposite ends of the authoritarian/liberty spectrum. But I think I can understand the appeal, the shared connection in cautious noninterventionism. The speech to me is a cautious one leading to the conclusion:


This is no small question. I see the vote on whether to go to war in very personal terms. I will not vote to send my son, your son, or anyone's daughter to war unless a compelling American interest is present. I am not convinced that we have a compelling interest in the Syrian civil war.

May God help us make the wise decision here and avoid an unnecessary war.

Nonintervensionism says, as Washington did in his farewell address, do not meddle in the affairs of sovereign states without compelling interest.


Note, noninterventionism is not the same thing as isolationism.

[ptif219]

I stopped at reading "obama wants us to be allies with AQ." Is it possible for a Republican to open his mouth without lying? What a sad state of affairs that this little shit gets any respect from the GOP.
Obama is supporting the rebels that are under AQ. You can deny it but it is true.

[ptif219]

they don't care what their "leaders" say... so long as they throw red meat to the base.


You must be talking about democrats and Obama

[ptif219]

I'd never thought I'd see the day; that Republicans would shy away from War ...
Thank You Thank You Thank You ... President Barack Hussein Obama
Thank You Thank You Thank You ... President George W Bush:applause:

"I'm tired of the eye-rolling and the easy nit-picking of the president's leadership on this over the last few weeks. The truth is: his threat of war galvanized the world and America, raised the profile of the issue of chemical weapons more powerfully than ever before, ensured that this atrocity would not be easily ignored and fostered a diplomatic initiative to resolve the issue without use of arms."

Yes, it’s been messy. A more cautious president would have ducked it. Knowing full well it could scramble his presidency, Obama nonetheless believed that stopping chemical weapons use is worth it – for the long run, and for Americans as well as Syrians. Putin understands this as well. Those chemical weapons, if uncontrolled, could easily slip into the hands of rebels whose second target, after Assad and the Alawites and the Christians, would be Russia.

This emphatically does not solve the Syria implosion. But Obama has never promised to.

What it does offer is a nonviolent way toward taking the chemical weapons issue off the table. Just because we cannot solve everything does not mean we cannot solve something. And the core truth is that without Obama’s willingness to go out on a precarious limb, we would not have that opportunity.

http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2013/09/10/the-president-makes-the-case/



Problem is Obama said last night he does not care what congress or the public thinks or wants. He will do what he wants and you don't matter

[Cigar]

Problem is Obama said last night he does not care what congress or the public thinks or wants. He will do what he wants and you don't matter

Imagine that, a Black Man in this day in age not doing what he's told to do ... the nerve I say. :grin:

[ptif219]

Imagine that, a Black Man in this day in age not doing what he's told to do ... the nerve I say. :grin:


You mean an arrogant elitist that has no idea what he is doing

[Cigar]

You mean an arrogant elitist that has no idea what he is doing

Arrogant Elitist in your opinion and YOU have no idea what he's doing ...

That's ok with me.

[ptif219]

Arrogant Elitist in your opinion and YOU have no idea what he's doing ...

That's ok with me.


Then his speech last night was a lie?