-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.

So ... right to life (in this

So ... right to life (in this case being the right to not be killed by a drone) is not important, but blindly attacking a corner stone of the free market is?

Our movement is not against banks ... it is against Corporatism, Economic Fascism, and Keynesian economics.

Also, no government branch has the power to 'interpret' the constitution. Not even the Supreme Court as the power to 'interpret' is not listed in Article III anywhere.

Article III:

Section 1.

The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behaviour, and shall, at stated times, receive for their services, a compensation, which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office.

Section 2.

The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority;--to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls;--to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction;--to controversies to which the United States shall be a party;--to controversies between two or more states;--between a state and citizens of another state;--between citizens of different states;--between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states, and between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects.

In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction. In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make.

The trial of all crimes, except in cases of impeachment, shall be by jury; and such trial shall be held in the state where the said crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any state, the trial shall be at such place or places as the Congress may by law have directed.

Section 3.

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.

The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted.

Wow

Are you a Blue Republican or Occupy Wall Street protester? Libertarian movement is not about fighting banks or bankers. It is about letting banks to compete without government help, the FED, and FDIC insurance. Government regulations should be kept at minimum to assist in tracing possible past fraud and other detective work.

Well I would and have .

Considered my self to be both.

Then this

framework (DP) is not the best place for arguments between different ideological movements. This is between already converted to the Libertarian idea: government should be sepearated from economy, private property should not be burdened with lots of regulations and taxes.

As a reference to understand why we believe in this, check a free book available on line - "Economics in one lesson" by Henry Hazlitt.

P.S. Regarding the Constitution, you are right in part. What you have overlooked: 1) not much is left from the Constitution today considering permanent violations by the government and courts; 2) if Constitution happens to violate individual rights (say, slavery), it is human reason that must rebel against it, any way possible.

Not here to keep Rand on the straight 'n narrow, but..

"we already know. The President will not drone unarmed citizens in the United States."

No one knows that, and Obama has proved that he has no good intention towards the United States.

Taking Obama for granted that he has a good heart? When has he shown that?

Laugh, admit it, you're just takin' a cheap shot at Rand. Is it your own impotency that you're concerned about?

Well maybe.

But I do hope that Rand reads my article and I do hope that Rand becomes a better senator for reading my artcle.

sharkhearted's picture

Oh so you would vote for a collectivist and socialist

You and Alexander Hamilton would vote for the statist lady from Massachusetts.

The REST of us who subscribe to the Jeffersonian and Lockean idea that government does not give us our rights...WE DO....will stand with Rand.

I applaud Elizabeth Warren for standing up to Jamie Diamond and other uber-criminals like him and challenging him with the idea that how dare he or any other bank....is too big to fail.

Good for her. But when it comes to her ideas on social contracts, etc....I would vehemently disagree.

As for who I want as a president....Rand or Elizabeth....I will take Rand any day....however...as an anarchist..I don't want (or NEED) neither.

THE AGE OF AUTHORITARIANISM IS DEAD.

~Chris
Norfolk, VA

Time to INVESTIGATE the investigators of 9/11. PROSECUTE the prosecutors. EXPOSE the cover-up.

Thankyou

And I respect your point of view.

you do not beleave in liberty

Why are you here. Its obvious that the principles that members of this site hold dear are ones that you do not understand nor beleave in. Why post here then. Are you so naive to think your post that is totally without substance or merit would change the minds of real people with real philosophical convictions.

Your wasting your time.

Go comment on some article from the daily beast.

Séamusín

Im sorry you feel that way.

But I do not want this group to live in a bubble of their own self -gratitude. Isnt that what happened to the Republicans?

Thank you for posting.

Extremely educational.

In more ways than zero.

Defeat the panda-industrial complex

I am dusk icon. anagram me.

How DARE...

anyone disagree with something Rand does or says!

Prepare the guillotines!!!

.
~wobbles but doesn't fall down~

No thanks.

I'm about as luke-warm on Rand as a person could be, but you seem to be trying to sharpen your teeth with the art of dismissal. That is, you're making claims that do not represent an argument, but simply appeal to peoples emotions. You lose ALL credibility when you attempt the bullshit that the MSM did all through the election cycle like calling Rand "Don Quixote." I think you were aware of what you were doing. I think it was disingenuous, at best.

"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."

Really? You already knew that? How about when they murdered Anwar and his 16 y/o son in Yemen? They were AMERICAN'S. They murder INNOCENT people EVERY DAY in PAKISTAN with immunity. Then Obama admin signs in NDAA saying they can snatch you up anytime they feel and for however long they like. Which part of the constitution HASN'T been completely ignored? And you're going to pretend like you KNEW this? NONSENSE. Everyone knows what Rand did was to a large degree grand-standing. But at least people are talking about the possibility. Which is the first step.

As for your Elizabeth Warren crush, I'll take Dr. Paul's excellent assessment:

Ron Paul: Why Elizabeth Warren is Wrong
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=glvkLEUC_6Q

i am right there

with you.
+1.

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

I know at the LEAST this is controversial.

but I will continue to bring forth thought-provoking's messages, I do so because I am not a troll. It is because I want to continually move this group forward. And to continue to raise awareness of the importance of always looking at the other side of the argument not because I am a troll but because is because I want can to continually move this group to look at something in a different light. And even though you might not agree with me. This just has to be said it has to be said to move you forward and to continue your journey to think about the other side of the argument. What I said has to be said. "I did not come to bring peace I came to bring a sword"Jesus Christ.

i sympathize with your

i sympathize with your efforts. it needs to be done. it's far too easy to slip into a lazy state of mind that accepts without being critical.

but if you want to get anywhere, stick to substantive arguments.

Thought Provoking?

Yeah, I guess so... It provoked me to think "What is lance thinking?"

I'm only posting here ...

... to let you know I didn't bother reading your post.

Based on your title? Two things:

1) Another Rand baiting post with 0 merit. Another whiner using any excuse or lie to slander one of the ONLY people in DC that are working on our side, and

2) Obviously you know nothing about Elizebeth Warren. Because you latched onto this superficial story about her standing up to the banks, while fully NOT knowing her "solutions" are all about more government power and redistributing wealth.

I took three minutes out of my morning, because somebody needs to call these idiot trolls out on their bs.

lancealothink

is someobody who previously said FDR was one of the best POTUS's. HE/She thinks we need massive stimulus for job growth, like having the gubbermant fund a monorail. Lancealotlink shares the same views as Warren, and I am pretty sure lanealothink understands Warren's views.

“When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.” – Dresden James

Ah, Ok.

ie. "Troll"

Say no more ...

Before you click

the post button for a thread supporting a socialist with the intent to mock others who do not hold that view, best if you check your spelling and grammar, it's all over the place. You know it's bad when I out of all people have to point it out.

“When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.” – Dresden James