35 votes

Sen. Rand Paul Fox News Sunday 9/8/13

Rand Paul: "We'd Become an Ally to Al Qaeda" FULL Fox News Sunday Interview


(Thanks for the link, ThereIsNoSpoon and goldenequity)

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said Sunday that he won't filibuster a vote on use of force against Syria, but he will fight to ensure President Barack Obama cannot act without congressional approval.

"I will insist on at least one vote where we try to say, hey, this is not political show," Paul said on "Fox News Sunday." "This is not constitutional theater, this is a binding vote." Read more

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

Here is an example of a straight and direct answer Rand

I wish Rand would give this type of straight answer to the impeachment and constitutionality question.

what are thse american interests

rand is referring to? would that be like NSA spying on every US citizen and condemning the people who bring it to our attention? or the FED and the keynesian economics that will one day destroy the dollar? or spy drones? or drones abroad killing innocents? that's our property, are they american interests? the police state supported by both parties? and israel, turkey and jordan? what? huh? doesn't israel and saudi arabia want this strike bad? who cares what they want. would a personal call from nutansyahoo change rand's mind? at times he sounds like he's for an all out victory war, regime change. "this man should get death" he says of assad. and the innocents killed by US forces and the leaders, what should they get? you know like the laughing hooting machine gunners manning exposed. rand is perplexing. you want to give him the benefit then you see an interview like this and wonder wtf?

That's my biggest problem with Rand

He never gives straight answers! He seems to never give direct answers to direct questions. That irritates me!

Rand IS a politician,

Rand IS a politician, remember?

Wrong Answers?

They're perfectly clear to me. Maybe he's giving answers that you don't want to hear.

Freedom is my Worship Word!

Umm, ya!

First, I never said wrong answers. My comment isn't long, so I don't know where you got the word "wrong" from, but I didn't say that. And ya, he didnt give the answers that I wanted to hear. When he kept pressing him by asking if evidence was found that Assad used chemical weapons, would he support intervention then? His answer should have been no. Not, "well the interesting thing is...blah blah blah". I'm not saying I hate Rand, I just don't like his political talk, that's all.


Well the big term isolationist is being used once again by the traitorous N.W.O.
After NAFTA was brought in by the Clinton regime then Bush used it to strip our Country
Of jobs and personal financial stability.
The big buzz word to anyone that spoke out against this treasonous act was called an isolationist.
Bushes crew and MSM (one in the same) used it constantly.
Now they are trying it again,,, Too bad for them the people are wise to their lies!!!
Somebody needs to kick this maggot in the ass!


Didn't you get the memo? If

Didn't you get the memo? If you're not joining a gang and beating up other kids for their money, you're an isolationist!

Rand's cheekbones are in top form today

oh, and he does make a lot of sense, too.


There's a lot Rand is holding back, but someday, I'd like to hear him suggest this when asked if our government should fix humanitarian problems.

Those who are concerned about the dying children are free to grab a gun, get on a plane, and head over there and fight for them.

Of course, people don't do that, because they don't care enough to put their own money and life on the line. They only care when they think someone else is paying for it, or someone else is getting their legs blown off.

Amazing how much Obama and Kerry and McCain and Graham care about those children. They are SOOOO compassionate, as long as they're wasting the lives and money of others.

I see no reason John McCain can't be over there driving a convoy and getting his legs blown off, rather than having it happen to a 20 year old that will need lifetime care, including possibly being a vegetable from head trauma.



"I, __________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic."


There is no duration defined in the Oath

Bingo. I'd really like to hear Rand state...

..."as president, I'd set up web site that would take voluntary contributions and direct volunteers to aid humanitarian causes, but I can't in good conscience FORCE someone to aid MY favorite humanitarian cause when he or she might hold another closer to his or her heart."

We did not declare war

on Germany because the jews were being gassed. We declared war on Japan after they bombed Pearl Harbor. Two days later Germany declared war on the U.S. and the following day we declared war on Germany.


We didn't even know all of that was going until Russia marched in from the east and we marched in from the west. I wish everyone in Congress was as academically correct as you are.

I freaking HATE Rand when he

I freaking HATE Rand when he is always so wishy washy, He can't give damn straight answer... Stop with "it's interesting" or "you know" when you answer... Just yes or no... PLEASE!! learn from your dad..

If you disagree with me on anything you are not a real libertarian...


Ron had his too. Drawing out a quizzical "Well..." at the start of a response sounded like he was considering his interviewer's or opponent's position and implied "I understand what you're trying to say, but let me explain to you how it should be." And his tone. It wasn't condescending, but it was "fatherly advice" in nature. Together, it was very effective at dodging verbal punches and letting the air of the balloons of a-holes and idiots.

Most political debates these days are two sides emphatically arguing their points (think Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, etc.). In contrast, like with Ron & Rand, when one side sounds like they've actually considered the other's opinion, it deflates the other's attack power.

"It's interesting" is similar to "Well..." In a split second it sounds like "Did he just agree with what I was saying?", "Did he say it was interesting?", or "What's so interesting?" People are going to listen to what he has to say because it sounds like he's considering both sides of the argument. "You know..." is extremely subtly, but I believe is psychological in nature as well. "He's telling me, I already know something or should already know something..."

My favorites to hate that lots of politicians and political commentators completely overuse are "Look..." and "At the end of the day..."—sometimes combined to form a super powerful magic-wand segue into the speaker's talking points. "Look, at the end of the day, most people agree with me about this." These, however, don't have the effectiveness of dodging verbal punches. "Look" is more stern, like "I know what I'm talking about, and you don't," but it steers you in the direction of what the speaker is saying. Why? Because, in everyday life if you hear someone say "look" it grabs your attention. "Look at that"..."Look out."

"Look" is an attention getter. "At the end of the day" has a different approach. Who doesn't like the end of the day? This speaker has just associated his talking point with the thought of the day's end. That sounds nice. I can put my feet up and relax. It's universal.

Some of you might think this is complete hogwash. I'm not saying you're being brainwashed, but I do believe these subtle psychological cues are intentionally used for winning over arguments, changing opinions, or at the very least steering conversations. But, that's just been my observation.

I don't know how Rand used them in this video (I wasn't going to go back and watch it twice), but I've heard him say them enough in the past to pick up on this as well. I'm sure they come natural to him at this point, and I doubt they're going anywhere.

But, you know, at the end of the day, does it really matter?

How did that tactic work for Ron!

I understand what you are saying and it would be nice but Ron tried that approach and he got slaughtered. First you have to gain the trust of those in power and be elected into those power positions. Once in you can say what you really think but until then you have to talk the talk. I believe Rand, down deep, believes what his dad believes in but he is being more diplomatic so he can get into power positions his father could never attain. Ron was never going to be President. His real worth has been mobilizing the young people to take back this Republic because they are the ones who can and must get the job done.

Ron did not get "slaughtered".

A difference of a few thousand votes in Iowa, and he may very well have been elected president. Ron would never have grown the freedom movement as much as he had if he had acted the way Rand is. That's a fact. Rand is riding on Ron's coattails, and, if he isn't careful, he could squander that good will that the American people gave Ron. You can't "lie your way to liberty." Give me a straight-talkin' Ron Paul over a mealy mouthed Rand Paul any day.

Call it what you like

the old guard in the party would not have allowed Ron to win. All evidence points to Ron winning Iowa outright but the party made sure he was marginalized by refusing to acknowledge the victory( They admitted later he did win when it is too late). I was heavily involved with Ron's campaign in Indiana in 2008 and 2012 and attended the State Convention both years. What they did to us at the convention was criminal but the old guard was not going to allow Ron, or his supporters, to prevail. Rand will go much further then Ron did and once he does get a foothold I believe you will see a change in policy towards his dads beliefs.

"...once he does get a foothold I believe you will see a change

in policy towards his dads beliefs."

Even if that were true (and it is highly doubtful -- Rand simply does not believe in liberty), you reap what you sow. It is true that FDR lying got him in office, and then he showed his true colors once in office. But this can only work for evil, lying can never promote good. I will not vote for a liar.

I thought it was wise

to say the president has over reached in many areas, putting him outside the Constitution, instead of saying if he attacks it's impeachable. He drew a line around the president, instead of drawing a line around himself.

It was cringeable when he offered up Benghazi as a place where we should intervene. I'm not sure if that was a rhetorical mistake or if he really wants to meddle in Libya.

It is a great tactic for staying on his message...

You right, he does it a lot - and we certainly notice it... But that is how he drives the narrative, not letting the questioner get a sound bite they want.

So - to me, it is annoying and awesome at the same time. I think we find it annoying because it is used so often to the ill of the nation (political double-speak)...

Rand is 10x the politician his father was...
Ron is 5x the leader Rand is...

and for what it's worth...

it makes for a miraculously smooth interview with the likes of Chris Wallace

He's definitely not his dad...

but you could also argue that is why Ron never could get his ideas anywhere. Just say'in.


DR. Paul "never could get his ideas anywhere?" And everyone now wants to go to war in Syria?? You really need to go read the Yahoo comments sections. Almost all posts and comments read as if they're directly from Ron Paul's platform.

Daily PAUL

..offered on a

forum advancing the ideas of Ron Paul, discussing his senator son, as Congress enjoys an historic opportunity to reassert war power?

Debbie's picture

That was outstanding.

Thank you.



Chris Matthews likes him. I never thought I would see that day.

Rand has gotten so damn good at speaking on television. He knocked it out of the park. He stayed on his message and drove it home.

Anyone in our movement on the fence about Rand needs their head checked. Rand has consistently stood up for the same principles we all share.

I hope he wins in 16. He has the skills to right the ship. That is leadership I hope the country gets behind.

Rand Paul 2016

'Peace is a powerful message.' Ron Paul

Bump for Accuracy!

I strongly agree!

Exercise Liberty!

America Rising.
The Constitution Stands.

"That the pen is mightier than the sword would be proven false; if I should take my sword and cut off the hand that holds the pen" - American Nomad