Posted on 01/09/2020 10:46:04 AM PST by EyesOfTX
Lifetime term limits would help solve a lot.
Typo, meant to say “Rand’’ Danged middle aged eye sight!
Rand is ok on some stuff. But when it comes to defending the USA he is just as crazy as his old man.
Utah-no one there better. Hatch? Chavtez? Come on. Paul-At least he votes right. It’s grandstanding and I’ll let POTUS slap him around as necessary while WE vote for him.
Publicity.
Sorry, if you think Rand Paul is part of the swamp, you are completely ignorant of what the swamp is and how it behaves, as well as ignorant of who Paul is and where he comes from.
Bearing false witness is an immoral act and you should refrain from future such acts.
“Why can’t these politicians just shut up and be thought fools rather than open their mouths and remove all doubts?”
That’s not the job of a senator. And there are still more than a few people in the executive branch who are determined to have a hot shooting war with Iran and continue the neocon agenda. Anyone wanting to take us to war, a new war, should realistically expect to face some very hard questions.
Sounds like the briefing was really bad — questions not answered, short, and dismissive. I think its ok to call out your own team once in a while. I’m guessing the WH/military will need to respond with a better briefing.
The people who are “swamp” are not Paul and probably not Lee. The swamp would be the establishment people who can’t give any straight answers about “imminent attack” (didn’t we hear that before with Iraq), who are intent on stopping President Trump’s campaign pledge of withdrawal, who want all the globalist organizations Trump opposed to survive. These are the same neocons who want us to stay in Syria, a place we have no right to be (and the BS “failed state” argument some used here in the past is no longer valid, is it?)
What on Earth does NATO have to do with the Middle East??
The same swamp people could also order a hit on a US citizen and use the same patriotism argument to defend their decision.
*We* will be a failed state is we don’t stop running trillion dollar deficits.
I don’t consider either one of these guys “RINOs.” Rand Paul is more of a Libertarian-Republican. Quite frankly, I think he speaks from deeply-held beliefs and often adds depth to the debates in DC. Mike Lee is cut from the same cloth. Mitt Romney is a RINO with with a capital R.
Term limits would not help at all. Not even slightly. All of the permanent staff, libbyists, and bureaucracy would be even more empowered, and simply would serve a new figurehead in the office every couple of years. All of the staff would remain. Term limits would be helpful if that included staff members... and maybe a lifetime ban on being a lobbyist after you had served in office
This is such a small issue about very specific details that only the Democrats really care about it. What they said wasn’t helpful but they’ll come back to the ranch on most issues and this will be old news quite quickly.
I think the Democrats that went against the party on impeachment are much more significant than something like this.
That being said, I love your writing and read your articles on a daily basis.
“Why can’t these politicians just shut up and be thought fools rather than open their mouths and remove all doubts?”
Mike Lee is compromised, I suggest,... with absolutely no proof. Koch Bro’s like H1 B1 = Lee Donor. (So does Mike, to the point of nuisance.)
And, Rand Paul, he is the show horse for Libertarian isolationism.
Oh, snap. Koch’s are Libertarians.
I think you misspelled “Tea Party darlings”
I don’t think that’s the case with Rand Paul. I think they were given a crappy briefing, and they called people out on it. I don’t always agree with him 100%, but he stands very firmly on principles, and he is the most closely following the Constitution senator out there.
When he complains about something, it’s worth giving a couple of minutes of serious thought to his complaint
I’m not sure if I get it either. I don’t know if there is a hidden agenda for Rand or Mike. Mike is a pretty solid conservative normally, not perfect, but not part of the swamp. Rand is good to have on our side, not as strong as Mike for sure but I don’t consider him part of the elite swamp rats either. I don’t like a lot of stuff Rand Paul does, but he mostly ends up on the right side.
Both are pretty outspoken an unabashed. Again, I’m not sure where this is coming from. Is it possible the briefings are now marginalized in committee because of a lack of trust for some of the other participants?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.