Skip to comments.Rand Paul Wins: Changing of the Guard?
Posted on 03/07/2013 1:17:52 PM PST by BarnacleCenturion
Earlier today, I noted that Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) were on opposite sides of a generational divide in the GOP that goes beyond ideology. That flared into an open spat as McCain, along with his closest amigo, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), openly slammed Paul, calling him uninformed. Graham pronounced that Paul didnt deserve an answer. McCain hissed: The country needs more senators who care about liberty, but if Mr. Paul wants to be taken seriously, he needs to do more than pull political stunts that fire up impressionable libertarian kids in their college dorms. He needs to know what hes talking about. That peevish retort may have reflected McCains sense that he had been badly upstaged. Or maybe he hadnt followed the debate.
Then, with near-perfect timing, Paul got his response in a two-sentence letter from Attorney General Eric Holder. The first sentence was dishonest: It has come to my attention you have now asked an additional question: Does the President have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil? In fact, that was Pauls question all along. But Holder then admitted, no, the U.S. government doesnt have the authority to target U.S. citizens at home who are not involved in hostilities.
Rand Paul got to crow in a series of interviews. He had pried an answer out of a White House habitually averse to treating a co-equal branch with respect. He certainly got more done than Graham and McCain did last night by attending a Georgetown dinner with the president, a White House move no doubt intended to reverse the presidents slide in the polls and make it seem like he was reaching out to Republicans.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
I like Ted Cruz so far.
I don’t like the guy who voted for Hagel.
I do not recall him ever having shown an anti-semitic side.
In some quarters, insufficient enthusiasm for the current security policies of the State of Israel or for lavish American aid to the State of Israel is regarded as evidence of anti-Semitism.
I like Cruz also, but he’s Canadian.
I don't know... how can a "generational divide" possibly "flare?" A "generational divide" is an abstraction, an intellectual construct.
The author of the piece substituted an inanimate concept - which can't "flare," or do anything else - for one or both of a pair of human beings who can. McCain took the wrong side here, as elderly Republicans usually do, attacking one of his fellow party members from behind.
By making it sound like the "generational argument" is the issue instead of John McCain being the issue, the author took the passive voice, as I understand it.
>> “Rand must seize this opportunity to take the reins of the party......it cannot wait.” <<
I agree. - He’s the closest thing the GOP has to a leader.
Rand Paul stood on his feet and McCain sat on his ass.
Trust me. My high school English teacher went crazy if we used passive voice in an essay, (i.e. the voice used to indicate that the grammatical subject of the verb is the recipient and not the source of the action denoted by the verb.
Passive voice eliminates the need for a subject, which makes it an excellent tool for sleazy politicians who don't want to take responsibility for their actions.
For example: "Mistakes were made," rather than "I made a mistake."
Even when the subject is specified in passive voice (i.e. "Mistakes were made by me," rather than "I made a mistake), it is a very inelegant and stilted way of writing. It was a big no-no in Mr. Painter's senior English class.
For more info see: http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/passive.htm
Me too! BUMP!
That sounds a lot like "prove to me that you don't beat your wife." Rand Paul has never said or done anything remotely anti-Semitic, unless you're one of those people who assumes that cutting foreign aid (to all countries, not just Israel) is automatically "anti-Semitic."
Conservatives should really start looking for a new and more credible standard-bearer and stop pretending that Sarah Palin is still their one and only great white hope.
I'm not saying that Rand Paul is the perfect candidate by any means, but he's a lot more credible than someone who quits her job as governor in favor of giving speeches and appearing on ridiculous reality shows.
I have been under the misapprehension that the "passive voice" meant rearranging a sentence to sound less "active," particularly when describing something that could be taken as controversial.
Therefore, instead of saying "John McCain got in a public argument with Ron Paul," the author writes "an argument flared up between John McCain and Ron Paul." As if John McCain and Ron Paul were both going about their daily doings, and then all of a sudden this big ol' argument just somehow flared up between them. "Where'd that come from?" McCain asked. "I don't know but I wish it'd go away," Paul sighed.
I guess I thought that the term "passive voice" described a a writers mannerism which I find annoying, when in fact it describes something else. Thanks for enlightening me.
His girlfriend, Ms. Lindsay, showed her ample fanny, too and it’s up for re-election next time. : )
These two have done a total diservice to the consitution and two party political system in the US. They have not had an independent thought about reform in years. They are both out of touch elitists.
Nice to hear from two American-Americans (Rand and Cruz) for a change. I hope they ask Jan the Man, Director of the KGB, if they are terrorists for supporting the constitution like the rest of us have been classified and whether she’s found any bombs in the children’s panties at the airports. These people are criminally insane.
Get back to me after you go educate yourself, PDS'er:
“But Holder then admitted, no, the U.S. government doesnt have the authority to target U.S. citizens at home who are not involved in hostilities.”
Awww. Guess he’ll have to keep doing it the old fashioned way, by giving guns to drug cartels and letting them blow away a few border agents.
That is not a sure thing.
He’s at least as American as Obama. Let me put it that way.
The visual is too real...
Many have said that Rand Paul is against aid to Israel. He’s against foreign aid... period. And not specifically against foreign aid to Israel - but that’s the way it’s been reported mostly.
And his position against foreign aid is much like his view on welfare and other interventions - it hurts the free market economy to give ‘transfer payments’ - esp. when the US has to borrow from China to give to Afghanistan, Pakistan, Israel, or any other country.
“In Jerusalem last week, the senator met a broad range of leaders, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Shimon Peres, as well as Naftali Bennett, a rising right-wing leader aligned with the settler movement.
The Jerusalem Post quoted Paul addressing questions about what Israel should do about the settlements and Gaza. Well, he replied, America should and does have an opinion about these things, but ultimately these are decisions you have to make.
There hasnt been such a supportive comment on Israels settlements in the West Bank and in Jerusalem since Sarah Palin last spoke on the subject. Her comments drove the left up the wall.
Paul also voiced support on Gaza: I dont think you need to call me on the phone and get permission to stop missiles raining down from Gaza. He seems to want Israel to have a free hand in its own affairs, which dovetails with his wariness on foreign aid.
When he talked about foreign aid, he stood by his longtime contention that it would be a good thing to reduce such transfers. This view has been pressed by some pro-Israel voices in this country, in that aid has subsidized statist economic measures and retarded free-market development.”
Five times, which qualifies him as an enemy ace.