-133 votes

While Rand continues to fight imaginary drone strikes, Elizabeth Warren fights the banks

While the state of Kentucky suffers from the highest unemployment rate and is the nation's poorest state per capita the junior senator from Kentucky continues to do nothing about it. Instead Rand goes on a 14 hour rant about what might happen, what could happen or what might never happen. And after feeding his ego to get on the Rush Limbaugh show he declares a victory for something that we already know. The President will not drone unarmed citizens in the United States. Rand Paul is proving to be more of the Don Quixote of Washington DC and thanks to Rand's weakening of the TSA as Congressman Peter King noted an actual grade 1 bomb has managed to get through our airports.{I bet you didn't hear that on the Rush Limbaugh show}.

But while Randi continues to look in the mirror and brush his curly locks and repeats"one day I shall be President of the United States". There is actually a Senator out there who is fighting a real enemy, an actual enemy and not an imaginary one. This senator has decided to take on the most ruthless vile and destructive organization that has enslaved the American people since its inception, the banks and even though this senator wears the evil communist D at the end of her name she continues to hammer an organization that continues to operate "above the law'. I don't know about you but I certainly haven't seen any drones in my coffee shop but I have certainly seen many American lives destroyed and swept into poverty due to the ruthless greed of the banks.

God bless the libertarians they are a noble bunch but they actually have it all wrong. You see even though the Constitution is important it was never meant to be interpreted by Senators or Congressmen.The last thing you want your politician to do is to try to interpret the Constitution sure Dr. Paul was the champion of the Constitution and I'm talking about Ron here. But that is not the reason he continued to get reelected and remained wildly popular in his district.The real reason Dr. Paul was so popular with his district was because he brought home the bacon. He brought in massive amounts of pork he covered his districts back and they covered his back. So that he could continue his hobby of the Constitution. This is one thing that Rand seems to not understand and that is, his number one job is to take care of the people in his state. Senators were never meant to look at a bill to see if it was constitutional or not that is not a senators or representatives job. There first and foremost job is to look out for their state and their district not to interpret the Constitution.

The fact being our forefathers set up our system in a way that only few are even able to interpret the Constitution and that would be our Circuit Court judges and our Supreme court judges. These are the people who were appointed by our Presidents and are the only ones who are allowed to interpret the Constitution. Senators and Congressmen were not set up to do that. They were set up to do what is best for their state or their district. And I for one certainly do not want Ted Cruz to interpret the Constitution for me. I want him to do what is best for my state and that goes for all my Senators and Congressmen.

Even the President of the United States should not try to interpret the Constitution. The President first and foremost should look out for the American people. And only when you vote to choose a President you should keep in mind that he is only qualified to appoint someone who will interpret the Constitution and not to interpret the Constitution himself.

And personally, I would rather choose a President who has watched out and taken care of their state rather than trying to interpret the Constitution. That is why I would choose the lady from Massachusetts any day over the gentleman from Kentucky to be my President.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

Imaginary? Mmmkay, tell all

Imaginary? Mmmkay, tell all the living relatives that when their son, daughter, father, mother, sister or brother got blown to bloody bits that it was just their imagination. Tell them that their grief is not real. Go tell the family of the sixteen year old, American citizen that was killed by a drone in Yemen, that is just their imagination. I guess the drones I see flying in my states skyways are just my over active imagination.

Drones are very real. People being droned into a bloody, red mist is very real. Imaginary, my ass.
It is more likely that we are fighting imaginary enemies.

As for Warren, eh, I never really trust the intentions of politicians with such strong ties to Israeli lobbyists. The rich irony of Elizabeth Warren asking her question to these regulators, whose ranks she would have joined but for a Republican effort to block her nomination prior to her Senate run, is that she is an advocate of increasing the very regulations that contributed to the financial meltdown and that prevent suits against Wall Street banks. After all, Wall Street was just complying with Washington’s orders.

I actually saw exactly what Warren asked, from videos

she or her staff posted on her own YouTube page.

Must say, if you think that's someone who's actually 'going after' someone, then Al Roker creates weather himself.

Warren never once threatened them with subpoena, nor stated how utterly illegal all of it was; granted merely even citing the fact that HSBC et al actually directly laundered $$ for drug cartels at a Senate hearing SHOULD be a big news, but by your own stated line of questioning Rand's motives, she's admitting the fact that banks CAN launder, by focusing on monetary compensation...to the govt Treasury's coffers (NOT the banks' customers or in specific cases its shareholders, or hell even the victims of the Cartel's brutal murder streak). THAT my friend, is the very definition of grandstanding.

Now, don't get me wrong, in the finality, all of this issue surrounding Rand's filibuster did NOT negate their BS nonsense that the POTUS has 'the RIGHT to murder anyone,' period. The entire argument is based on the premise that somehow a govt scum CAN murder its citizens; they're just arguing how and when that's 'appropriate.' Likewise, Elizabeth Warren is doing the same: her line of chiding already admits the fact that 'no one can or should go to jail over drug money laundering.' Her issues is "gee...when is enough, enough?" That's not the same as 'Hey, SEC tools, why the fcuk didn't you press the AG to indict and FBI to SWAT these motherfrakkers???'

Also, not for nothing, but a few minutes in a Senate hearing televised on CSPAN is targeted for politicos, wonks, and frankly us, the geopolitically awake, not the sheeple populace; in applicable terms: no body gives a shiite about a typical Senate hearing.

But, a 13hr filibuster that takes over an otherwise slow snowed out day in DC, that got EVERYONE in the political and many in the pop-culture world talking? That, people pay attention to.

That, is a net benefit, to all.

It raised a REAL issue of the possibility of a govt tyrant proclaiming powers it does not have to assassinate you me and anyone else it deems arbitrarily to be a threat. If you think that falls in the realm of useless granstanding... makes one believe you're focusing on the broken twig, and not seeing the forest, my friend.

"Instead Rand goes on a 14 hour rant about what might happen, what could happen or what might never happen."

If you consider the fact that they've already murdered 4 innocent Americans abroad, and in a letter Holder already proclaimed that in 'extreme' circumstances the POTUS would have the power to assassinate (just as John Yoo did under GWB), makes this a non-hypothetical.

It's like, really does govt legalese have to specifically state that 'FBI, DHS, & POTUS' own Praetorian Guards aka. Detachment Delta & DEVGRU have the 'right' to murder a DailyPaul blogger!' for this concept to sink in??

Seriously, where are we, the 1940's where everyone and anyone believed govt at their word?

Now, but here's where I differ. Knowing the reality of the Senate subpoena, where a single Senator cannot willy nilly demand to draw up subpoena as it has to be 'sanctioned' as there's the unfortunate reality of pecking order, I thank Liz Warren for bringing up an issue that likes of Alex Jones, Zero Hedge, LewRockwell et al and those in the alternative media have already pointed out these obvious facts (well... to those paying attention) yrs ago, WHEN the news about major Wall St. banks being charged by SEC for drug money laundering broke, as everyone who bothers to pay attention while shouldn't have to press Senate on these things, but always do, and at least for the public consumption (regardless of the fact that Senate hearing have no net effect on actual change, in any level), it got covered.

But a Senate filibuster, a 13hr speaking one? Gets the general populace talking. And it's always been about a Culture of Liberty. The more people know and are brought to question what govt can or cannot do, on a mass populace scale, it does in fact become slightly more difficult for govt scums to regularly 'get away with something.'

Sure, it may not stop them, but the seed of doubt has been planted in the public's subconscious. THAT, was Rand's whole point. That is why he narrowly focused on a specific point that no American politico can really deny: sure if you're a neoCon scumf*ck, you want everyone not you dead, but drone striking you or 'an American citizen...on American soil? No f'ng way Jose!' Same for liberals.

So yes, for the Constitutionally aware who are equally pointing out the fact that no, 'Rand's filibuster did not focus on questioning the fundamental basis for ALL drone strikes, nor POTUS' non-existent 'power' to murder on whim, a 'power' as cited on paper at least.' But, like I said, this is Rand's chess: it's to change public perception. Because ALL tyrannies exist on consent. What the F?? you say?? Yes, all tyrannies exist on the consent of the governed, as it's what level of tyranny any given populace is willing to put up with that sustains a tyranny be it a covert or an overt one. And when publicly it loses its legitimacy, no amount of self-proclaimed power it deludes it has, will be allowed to continue. It's as old as history.

So, Rand's tactic is so clear, viscerally, to understand for anyone who chooses to pay attention, all the legitimate criticisms against Rand on the specifics of the filibuster and others qualms, it really does not bother me much: he's definitely got momentum behind him. Now, all that matters is what the People do with it.

Predictions in due Time...

"Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it's realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy." - Dr. Ronald Ernest Paul

I respect your opinion.

And have always enjoyed reading your post An Cap Merc and all these things for which you said or quite possibly true but be patient Elizabeth Warren is still a "wide-eyed" Senator just as Rand once was.but what a potent force they would be if they decide to work hand-in-hand on the banking issue together

Elizabeth Warren is a....

hardcore socialist, just like the Too Big To Fail banks and Fed she claims to oppose. When she admits that her socialist ideology has caused most of America's problems, and points out that TBTF banks are socialist/fascist organizations, not capitalist, only then will she have a trace of credibility. Until then, she's playing U.S. citizens for fools, just like Obama and his partners in crime, the socialist Rockefeller Republicans who pretend that TBTF banks are capitalist.

http://www.dailypaul.com/277342 (Rand Paul: One person can make a difference)
http://www.StandUpForYourRights.me/?p=1264 (Fast and Furious hearing)

I, yah, yah, yah, yah Once again what have I done.

For weeks even months I have tried so hard to increase my positive ratings on this site I had built up a -7 rating instead of a -10 rating and now once again I'm completely blown it My negative ratings have shot completely through the roof. So forgive me for not having the right way of thinking for not saying the right things for always having to question what you and I believe in as abolute truths.

Once again I have taken my libertarian marching orders and completely torn them up and thrown them out the window.I have completely fallen off the wagon.I am constantly having to question my beliefs I am constantly having to bring up ideas that escaped the paths of libertarianism.

But the absolute truth is there are no absolute truths this government was set up to bring forth people with different ideas different ways of thinking in different ways to try to solve our problems it's called democracy and sometimes it wins and sometimes it fails.

To believe that libertarianism is the absolute perfect answer to all our problems will fail every time. As will conservatism and as liberalism will fail when taken to the extreme.Because none of us hold the same beliefs.

The best we could ever do is to walk all around mostly blindly knowing that there are no absolutes in democracy.

I like Sen. Rand Paul I really do I like the way he speaks I like what he says and I like what he does. But Sen. Paul is just a human being with many failures just as we all are.

I have even heard Sen. Paul Rand that is talk about how he even has overstepped the boundaries of the Constitution itself. I have heard him talk about how we have every right to stop unconstitutional searches and seizures of our property but we do not have this right when we are traveling and especially traveling on federal government property. I have heard him speak about how the government has every right for searches and seizures while traveling on federal lands.

You havea right not to be unlawfully searched not to have your property seized but you do not have the right to handcuff the TSA when traveling on federal property. That is why it is greatly concerns me that Sen. Paul has put my life in your life in danger .

Just think about this , had that actual grade one bomb had gone off on an airplane the one that had gone through the TSA. Not only does that put innocent lives in danger but if this were really were happen it would easily be the end of Rand Paul's political career much less his presidential run. And most likely he would end the liberty movement.

Rand is playing a dangerous game and I think there should be people to speak up and tell him when he has overstepped his boundaries.We can use liberty,but use it wisely it is a serious matter and should never be put before the choice of prudence.

if you have some time

maybe this documentary could help you understand the message of liberty and how we are better as free individuals.

kind people rock

hang in there. if you live

hang in there. if you live in a safe neigborhood, take a walk for a few miles. get some fresh air.


here's an absolute truth

we don't care how you think. you are free to do and believe as you wish.
until you use force.
can't say that for conservatives or libs, you're all about force.

"The two weakest arguments for any issue on the House floor are moral and constitutional"
Ron Paul

Instead of standing with us and building bridges

Instead of applauding Rand's stand, that he did because he understands how the constitution works.. no one came up to Rand and said.. "Hey, such and such a time we're going to fillibuster..." Rand is awake, and he kept on topic, and he took a new lead in the GOP.. one that incorporates the value of life, and while so many believe there was so much more that could have been said, or should have been said, the message Rand gave was a wake up call.

Instead of congratulating Rand for waking people up, and giving antiwar a big move in the right direction, you come here to knock Rand, ignor his own legislation of ending the fed and push an old story about Warren who has done nothing since. Good for Warren for standing up to the banks! Bravo!!

It doesn't top what Rand did.

Rand's filibuster was good in bringing attention to drones

and tyranny. But, come on, Granger, antiwar? It was the opposite of that. It was about due process here at home. He said noting about drones killing innocents abroad.

I am very pleased that the media is forced to cover American civil liberties. Thank you, Rand! But I am beginning to wonder how effective it was on overall liberty. It seems now that the acceptance of surveillance drones spying on us, audio included, inside our homes is now 'consensus'. If Rand won't address it than who?

As Zhou Enlai replied when asked what he thought the effects of the French Revolution were, "We shall see".

You eating? I had to go spurge on a Ruth's Chris filet. Blowback.

The issue was not about killing innocents abroad

Ron Paul got tons of credit and support for being a messanger, and yet when Rand pulls this amazing fillabuster, it's "not enough". Well, I think it's great and I'm glad it's got people talking about it, and even more, it gives me hope that this is how we begin ending tyranny. I'm happy to see Rand make a great stride in leadership from his own perspective, not because someone set him up as a puppeteer.

I began drinking juices when I returned from the convention.. I was really tired and have a lot to do.. like right now, I gotta go.. so I'm juicing this week and really really looking forward to having pizza for Easter Dinner. (((((((((dducky))))))))

Won't finish reading this

When your first paragraph is untrue and incorrect, I won't even pretend to read the rest.

How can any of you defend warren?

She's a clear socialist and her intentions are driven by and towards this goal. As well intended as it may appear its still socialism. Which is bad.


Is this an article? Where is the link?

While there are many things

While there are many things to comment on and correct, there is one part I found particularly funny:

And only when you vote to choose a President you should keep in mind that he is only qualified to appoint someone who will interpret the Constitution and not to interpret the Constitution himself.

True, the President shouldn't have the growing power that they gain every year and their cabinet shouldn't assume the powers of a king and feel that they can interpret the Constitution, but if a President isn't qualified enough to know what the Constitution says/is/contains, how can they be qualified to appoint someone who does?

The President first and foremost should look out for the American people.

Isn't this the same justification used to create the Federal Reserve, start undeclared wars, and grow the welfare state?

"Imaginary Drone Strikes"

Incredibly naive. You know i remember like 4 years ago when Ron Paul got up in front of congress and spoke about assassination of american citizens without a trial.....and the response was much the same.."what is this lune talking about?????" A year or two after he talked about it..sure enough it happened.

Rands fight was anything but imaginary.


Had nothing to do with fighting the banks?

I'm not a conspiracy theorist, I'm just well-informed

Yeah really


Intrepret the Consititution????

I thought the FED is legal since it is the 16th Admendment .. SO according to you the only ones who can defeat it are the Supreme Court .. and all the Senators and Congressman and President don't need to bother ... Complete contradictory BS you spew

Yeah, she is pretty entertaining.

She sounds more like Ron Paul than Rand these days.

Love or fear? Choose again with every breath.

Citizens need guns

If the congressmen think they don't need to understand and interpret the constitution.
I kept looking for the original link for the essay posted above. I can't believe someone at the daily Paul wrote that.
It's well written but it belongs in a speech bubble coming out the mouth of Andre the giant on an OBEY poster

The reason Ron Paul got elected.

I have been living in RP district and involved in every election he was in.. This about him being elected because he brought PORK is a huge lie. Not true the average person dont see any federal pork from a congressman. I have got no pork from washington yet I have been helping RP to stay in congress the entire time.

Easy to make big claims.

Rand Paul sold me out. Real sick of all you Rand Paul lovers.

The Rothschild false national debt crime scam holds the population in a position of false debt slavery. Any and every immorality is heaped the population based upon claims of IRS collection false debt.

Usury the bane of humanity has reared its ugly head and so many greedy sold out humans think its a legitimate way to live.

Ending the fed is such a small thing compared to ending the multi generational six hundered year family crime spreee of the Rothschilds and their clingon underlings who not only run the Fed but run all central banks and most all governments, media, spy agencies, own most all major corps and on and on. But if you counterfited most every governments money as debt. Why would not you own everything to.


Hey bro.

Did you ever hear of the Federal Reserve? You know, the central bank that prints US currency and just gives it to other said banks, so they can re-invest it for their own personal gain.

I like Warren and all, but until she signs on to Rand Paul's Fed Transparency Act, I don't think you should be making a fool of yourself in these parts. Now go back to http://www.reddit.com/r/EnoughPaulspam

And if the band you're in starts playing different tunes, I'll see you on the dark side of the moon.

Use This Article As A Learning Experience

Folks -

I don't know if the writer of the article is serious or not. Either way, it is a good example of the pattern of thinking that dominates the voting majority. This how the people who chose our current government think.

Instead of making fun of the article or expressing shock, perhaps it would be better to try to figure out how to overcome the challenge of waking up this crowd.

Gene Louis
Supporting a Needed Tool for Government Feedback:
A Citizen-Operated Legal System.

Keep in mind...

this is the same crowd who will be unprepared for what will occur, and will be thronging the streets and threatening to take your families supplies... if your going to change their paradigm this late in the game you better get busy.... because he needs alot of convincing..lol.

Think for yourself......Question authority...

I Wrote To Rand

the other day after the filibuster asking him to make sure that drone legislation enshrines and codifies the "no drone attack on citizens on American soil" and that "American soil" be defined. We all know that congress critters have a different definition of words and phrases than most of the rest of us.

I have no illusion that they will honor anything in the legislation but at least we will know when they dishonor themselves and we can call them on it just as we know when they dishonor themselves and the Constitution when they exceed their "People given" powers.

OMFG... are you serious?

I think I just threw up in my mouth a little bit...

"the junior senator from Kentucky continues to do nothing about it."
"And after feeding his ego to get on the Rush Limbaugh show he declares a victory for something that we already know."
"The President will not drone unarmed citizens in the United States." HE IS STILL AMBIGUOUS IN HIS ANSWER ON THIS ISSUE..
"thanks to Rand's weakening of the TSA"
"she continues to hammer"..."

but where i really could just go off the tracks is your next entire statement.... i mean like seriously, my daughter could refute every word in it, and she's in high school.

"it was never meant to be interpreted by Senators or Congressmen.The last thing you want your politician to do is to try to interpret the Constitution"



I'm just going to stop already.. I know any more time I spend responding to this is really just time wasted...OBVIOUSLY. I'm sorry you choose to enslave yourself, but the gravy train is coming to an end, and all of the nannystaters are in for a really rude awakening called REALITY.

Maybe when the SHTF you'll get to be a FEMA refugee and somebody can keep taking care of you... because you surely can't take care of yourself.

Think for yourself......Question authority...

Can you lend money you don't have?

You don't seem to have the first understanding about how the money system or banking works. If you did you might make a cogent argument instead of peppering your rant with ad hominem attacks.

Can you lend money you don't have? Why does government allow banks to do so?

Do you even know how money is created?

Spend some time to educate yourself, you'll be far better off than trying to troll here.

Money as Debt: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rC720Cl3N-0

Rand has reintroduce Federal Reserve Transparency Act for 2013


I don't think Sen. Warren has co-sponsored yet

this is not surprising

your disdain for the Constitution has been apparent to anyone that has read any of your posts.

"The two weakest arguments for any issue on the House floor are moral and constitutional"
Ron Paul