525 votes

#StandWithRand: Rand Paul Filibuster Update & Open Thread

Filibuster began at 11:47am ET March 6, 2013
Filibuster ended at 12:40am ET March 7, 2013


He quoted Greenwald and even mentioned Luke Rudkowski's question to Gibbs about al-Awlaki's kid.

Now he's saying it's not partisan, and his proof is that he voted for Kerry and Hagel even though he has almost nothing in common with their politics.

This man is playing chess.

Edit to Add: I was inspired to add this quote by the Doctor "Speak up, speak often and don't worry about those that at this point can not understand as they can never un-hear what we tell them." ~ Ron Paul

On Twitter: #StandWithRand

Quotes of the Day

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
SteveMT's picture

After yesterday, this is difficult to listen to.

Graham and McCain are a disgrace to this country.

Yeah, I just turned it off. Couldn't stand another minute of it.

I am only replying to your comment to say that while you think it may be your opinion, I heard it for myself and I would say it's a fact! Disgusting.

“It is the food which you furnish to your mind that determines the whole character of your life.”
―Emmet Fox

I'm about ready to join you,

Durbin just talked about 'needing those people--to bring them under their CONTROL...'

I, for one, ALSO don't want drones due to surveillance possibilities...

It would be interesting to note just which Senators/Reps own stock in drone technologies...and compare that information to their views/voting record concerning drones.

O.P.O.G.G. - Fighting the attempted devolution of the rEVOLution
Ron Paul 2012...and beyond

Here ya go... a new thread:


It didn't take long for DPers to smell the awful stink.

“It is the food which you furnish to your mind that determines the whole character of your life.”
―Emmet Fox

Rand Paul quit his filibuster

Rand Paul quit his filibuster after just 13 hours. I'd expect a man interested in preserving the constitution to go at least 14. Apparently he takes issue with Obama's insistence on killing Americans at home, in their sleep or in front of the old teevee, with drones. As a matter of fact, I see nothing wrong with this and feel our founding fathers would agree with Obama on this very important matter of national security.
Americans are the greatest threat to America. They eat all of the food, get sick, and commit acts of crime. Eventually someone is going to have to regulate them, vis a vis killing them with high-tech military equipment.

Lucky for me, my house is fitted with a titanium roof, alien technology to fend off any superfluous drone attacks upon my residence.

I'm being sarcastic of course. Please laugh, now.

Praise be to God! This is a

Praise be to God! This is a good day! The spouse to a very highly decorated retired military officer who lives in my town just "liked" a pro-Rand filibuster comment I made on facebook. This person and the officer were big Gingrich fans who later became loud Romney supporters. The Paul message is getting out!!!!! This is a good day indeed!

Which Paul message

'is getting out’ through the filibuster?

Not Ron’s:
“The success of our drone program overseas leads officials to believe that drones should also be used over U.S. soil as well. In an attempt to ease criticism of the use of drones against American citizens, some in Congress propose more oversight, as if that should make us feel any better…Do we want to live in a society in which the government is constantly watching us from above?”
- February 18, 2013

The filibuster shifted the narrative from anti-drone to how, when and where they should be used - a very serious change of course in the debate. The fact that the filibuster was dressed up in the best tea party clothes does not make the message praiseworthy...even to Dr. No.

I'd say it is Ron's

Because we don't want drones, and the talk of oversight lead to Ted CVruz reading off tweets that represented Americans saying they didn't want drones, period.. that is the point.. and the beauty of this, is it will bring up the use of drone internationally and so the oversight will become in limiting the use of drones to military and large agriculutural projects.

As for the tea party, when it come to the Liberty Movement/ rEVOLution within the GOP, they are allies, while they may not agree 100% with Ron Paul and his foreign policy, Rand's step in the Ron Paul dirction is platable and opens the door to more liberty.

why give "god" praise for this??? thank RAND

Seems like if you give god credit for creating Rand's filibuster then you must also blame god for ending it so early...or did satan do that?

authoritarian much?

authoritarian much?

By asking a simple question??

By asking a simple question??

Great question, seems very

Great question, seems very sincere.

thank you, It was actually very sincere

thank you for not judging me!

BTW, still waiting on the answer, I wasn't kidding or being rude.

It's an honest question and should be simple to answer.

"ending it so early" "honest

"ending it so early"

"honest question"

12 hours is early? ok.

well if "god" was behind it then why stop?

god created all of the universe right?

But he can't help Rand talk longer than 12 hours??

If there was a "god" that mingled so heavily in our lives why does he not just end the drone program for us??

I applaud and give credit to RAND, not god.

lots of assumptions in there

lots of assumptions in there home boy.

the OP said nothing that you mentioned.

It's none of your buisness who he praises

let it go, try being tolerant

he can praise whoever he

he can praise whoever he wants, I just asked a simple question.

But somehow, he can say he praises god and my asking "why" is somehow intolerant??

Whatever you say thought-police!



Well done! 13 Hours....

I'd like to see Obomb'ya talk for 13 MINUTES without a teleprompter, let alone 13 hours.

The man flaps his gums for 12

The man flaps his gums for 12 hours to capture the people stupid enough to think voting matters and everyone here gets a "liberty 2016 hard-on". The Rand Paul Mouth-Froth club has grown to proportions that I couldn't have imagined.

There's nothing impressive about this. The man still let the 2013 NDAA pass (here's been swann's take: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LWGcyatZt-A&feature=player_em..., all after putting his tongue deep into the musky anus of Israel.

I honestly thought this board would have shifted towards unplugging from the system with a greater amount of anarcho-capitalism/agorism following the COMPLETE fleecing the GOP pulled on the liberty movement this last year. Now everyone cheers when one man stands up and talks simply to advance his own political standing. Baaa Baaa black sheep, have y'all any wool?

“Facts don’t cease to exist because they are ignored.” – Aldous Huxley

Explain yourself

There's a process, a transformation that people trapped in the Left-Right mindset must go through before they can get to where you are (assuming that is an ideal place to be). You're quick to insult Rand and people across this board who still have hope and who are still trying. If you disagree with these efforts, please explain your plan of action and how your words are so much more effective.

Here's my explanation

While I will submit to you that starting the conversation about gross civil liberty violations (as Rand did do with this filibuster ) is an important step toward educating the public about the abuses of our government, I'm loathe to see so many people place their faith in:

A.) A politcal elite that does not care for the consutution (support of one man or one idea does not change a corrupt party, of which both the reps/dems represent.)

B.) One man who happens to be a libertarian-leaning Republican who has shown a tendency towards those sacred cows of neo-conservatism (the israel trip, commentary about the supposedly unique relationship America/Israel have together, his support for the 2013 version of the NDAA as listed in my first post).

I am not trying to disuade people from being hopeful; if hope and blind faith sustain people, then so be it, that is their right. I too was hopeful this last election year RestoreOurNation, hopeful that the GOP might not sabotage itself, hopeful that Rand would have had the gumption to stand up to the GOP and not endorse Romney, hopeful that Dr. Paul would have been given a fair shake, hopeful that rule changes and blatant abuses wouldn't have happened to the duly elected delegates at the GOP convention; I was wrong.

You ask me to "explain my plan of action" and I am glad to do it, that's a fair question and I need to be honest and address it for you.

1. I have a small garden where I grow organic fruits/vegetables. I'm constantly working with people who are new to gardening and teaching them how to grow their own heirloom foods and how to properly dry/can/utilize them in their cooking. Doing this is one way that I will reach out to individuals. I'll usually hook and bait them with info about GMOs, etc, and they'll be shocked to find out what's happening. From this point, if works are good, I'll turn them onto some liberty-minded literature.

2. Each month I buy $100 worth of liberty-oriented books. Creature From Jekyll Island, End The Fed, selected works of Hayek/mises, etc. I try and turn people onto commentators like Tom Woods and Stefan Molyneux; if people respond in kind, I simply ask that they pass along what they know to their local friends/family who can be "converted" to such beliefs. If not, at least I've exposed them to my beliefs.

3. I am a registered Indendent and vote in local/state elections. I try especially to educate people in my city about Agenda 21 and various schemes that the federal government is attempting to do; this type of coalition building bypasses political alligences and religious dogma so I've found it to be very effective.

I am sorry about my outburst, but I do feel that a top-down national solution is fruitless and a waste of energy. I'd rather have 100 of my neighbors that have disconnected from "playing the game" of trying to work within the system instead of 10,000 supporters of any given politician. Rand has done some good with this filibuster in waking people up out of their trance, I cede that. I have gone from neoconservative-->moderate-->libertarian-->anarcho-capitalist in my polical transformation. I am seeking ways to live and prosper with liberty that is outside of reliance on the State. I apologize for not considering that others still have faith in the system; perhaps some good will come of it. I've simply learned to replace hope with action, and will never go back to supporting parties outside of a local/state setting. I hope this clears up some things about me; I want liberty and freedom just as much as anyone else on this board, though my means differ greatly.

“Facts don’t cease to exist because they are ignored.” – Aldous Huxley

Thanks for responding

If readers are anything like me, they're eager to refine their views and are completely open to polite challenges. I agree that "hope" is not a replacement for action, so I made sure to say "hope and trying..." because effort IS required; hope alone will change nothing.

I really don't disagree with anything you've said here. At home, we're basically following your action plan. In fact, our last public presentation was on Agenda 21, but our gardening skills still suck. For now, we're keeping our Republican and Democrat affiliations so we have the option to run/vote for local offices/councils, but we would prefer to switch to Libertarian like you.

I've gone through a similar political change as you have, and knowing how far I've come the last few years gives me more than just hope that many more will follow. Thank you for your efforts; I know it's making a difference.

If I have to disagree with anything, it's that I believe national voices (Napolitano, Jerry Doyle, Rand and of course Ron) can reach people more effectively than I can, and the way McCain and Graham are attacking Rand as a wacko (sounds familiar) increases my trust in him.

Once people start looking, they're going to find those voices that you appreciate just as Beck got me started. I don't think Rand is top-down. I mean, a bottom-up solution eventually reaches the top, right?

The Federal Govt., really govt. in general

Are for the most part a group of organized criminals, actually worse than the mob. It grows like a cancer and can never be limited.

RedPillPatriot is not wrong in his analysis.

It's true that everyone has their role to play and there are many paths to liberty, but recall the definition of insanity:

Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

However I do appreciate that Rand is trying to educate.


Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it. ~Thomas Paine

You are receiving many down votes.

I did not vote up or down.

Justin Amash *warned* against feinstein-lee.

I appreciate Rands effort. He may someday be able to accomplish the right goal(s). However, part of winning, imo, is educating the Amercian people to the truth. As difficult as it may be, it is the utmost responsibility for all representatives to explain in detail the pros and cons of any/all legislation. Otherwise, the People remain confused, or interpret wrongly which can potentially lead to a conditioned/desensitizing precedence or wrong path.

feistein-lee was NOT American apple pie.

Rands filibuster is to be commended. Things were left out, but it was still a good step in the right direction. NOBODY else took that initiative.

"What if the American people learn the truth" - Ron Paul

I bet that haterade tastes

I bet that haterade tastes pretty bitter

*See my above comment

*See my above comment explaining my position. The only "haterade" I drink is the kind that applies to the Federal Reserve and major political parties. :)

“Facts don’t cease to exist because they are ignored.” – Aldous Huxley

Will Rand vote "Yes" to nominate?

He cites that the President is the one who makes appointments, not the Senate. Well, I think he played that card just as part of the chess game. He voted for Hagel, to show that he is not just fighting against the president on everything, but it makes his filibuster solely and completely about the drone strikes. Smart move, but now... does he maintain the principle of voting for the presidents nominee?

What do you predict?

Jonny R
Fellow Lover of Liberty

He voted for Hagel because he believes a President

has the right to his/her appointments, WITH FULL DISCLOSURE. Since there hasn't been disclosure satisfactory to the Senator, I can't even guess whether or not he will vote yes at this time. Maybe he will, after making another statement. Who knows?

“It is the food which you furnish to your mind that determines the whole character of your life.”
―Emmet Fox