Holy Crap.

[dannno]

Everybody knows who Rand Paul is now.

[WarAnonymous]

Who???

[dannno]

Now he can run for President :)

[thoughtomator]

Various references to Rand and the filibuster are STILL trending #1 in most US cities, as well as nationally, and Rand's name is still on the top 10 list worldwide.

He's the new E.F. Hutton. (youngins should look up the reference)

[Todd]

I'm an Alternative music type of guy.

It's like when Nirvana went from underground to superstars. Hope we can all handle it.

[VBRonPaulFan]

Wow, look what happens when you stand up for the Constitution, limited government, and liberty. Hopefully the other scumbags in Congress will take notice.

[dannno]

I'm an Alternative music type of guy.

It's like when Nirvana went from underground to superstars. Hope we can all handle it Rand doesn't get suicided like Kurt Cobain.

FIFY

[ravedown]

wow-limbaugh is raving about rand- and ranting about mccain and graham. hang on....the world just turned upside down.

[HOLLYWOOD]

Let's take a look at Marxist Jeff Zucker's @ CNN,(Former head Marxist @ NBC) pushing his teleprompter puppets coverage of the Senator Rand Paul's US Senate filibuster in defense of civil liberties and the US Constitutional Rights for all Americans...

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/matthew-sheffield/2013/03/07/cnn-rand-paul-drone-filibuster-roger-ailes-obama-lazy


CNN Mocks Rand Paul Drone Filibuster, Plays Up Supposed Racism of Fox’s Roger Ailes

By Matthew Sheffield (http://newsbusters.org/bios/matthew-sheffield) | March 07, 2013 | 05:42




http://newsbusters.org/sites/default/files/user_pics/picture-4.jpg (http://newsbusters.org/bios/matthew-sheffield)
During the Wednesday edition of her CNN program “Outfront,” host Erin Burnett and her producers just could not stop themselves from deriding Kentucky Republican Rand Paul’s filibuster effort to block a Senate vote on John Brennan, President Obama's choice for CIA director.
While the show did give some serious discussion to the substance of Paul’s concern on behalf of Americans’ civil liberties, during the introduction of the segment, Burnett treated the matter rather flippantly and featured a graphic of the senator entitled “Sen. Paul Drones On… And On…”
Here is the transcript of Burnett’s opening to her segment:
http://newsbusters.org/sites/default/files/main_photos/2013/March/rand-paul-fillibuster.jpg

ERIN BURNETT: Outfront next, an old fashioned filibuster in Washington, D.C., Rand Paul talks and talks and talks and talks for hours. We are in hour eight. He is still talking. We will tell you why.
Good evening, everyone. I’m Erin Burnett.

“Outfront” tonight, senator Paul drones on and on and on and yes, he’s droning about drones. Here is a live picture of Republican Senator Rand Paul right now on the floor, the first old fashioned Senate filibuster since 2010. Look at him. Does he look tired to you? We are at hour eight. He still has a voice. I think all he has had is a snicker bar for fortification today. It is all an effort to stall John Brennan nomination from the CIA.

Now, we were hoping that he would have stopped droning on by now, not to interfere with the civic process, but because he was supposed to be our guest from Capitol Hill tonight. That’s where he was supposed to be standing. See how lonely it is? Senator Paul, we need you there. We are hoping you’re going to wrap this up soon and join us. At the least, I would like to know how you went all day without using the restroom. But, it sounds like Senator Paul is also hoping to wrap it up and join our shot.



Anyone who has ever watched her program for more a few seconds knows that Erin Burnett deliberately uses a breezy and informal tone in her show; it is a welcome contrast to the formalistic delivery almost everyone else at CNN seems to favor. That being said, it is fair to ask whether or not Burnett would have been so cavalier in introducing a segment on something about which liberals currently feel more passionately about. How about a story involving the concept of race?

Fortunately, one only needed to watch just a few more minutes of Burnett’s program to find the answer to that question as she decided to highlight an excerpt from an upcoming biography of Fox News president Roger Ailes.
The book in question, Roger Ailes Off Camera by Rush Limbaugh biographer Zev Chafets, was recently featured in an excerpt by Vanity Fair magazine (http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/2013/03/roger-ailes-biography-excerpt?wcmmode=disabled) which contained a number of piquant quotes, including the FNC chief bashing former Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich, but instead of doing a focus on the book, Burnett decided to narrow in solely on one small anecdote where Ailes, echoing an earlier statement (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXIre_mYfig) made by President Obama, calls the former junior senator from Illinois “lazy.”
In keeping with the current liberal habit of reinvigorating old racial stereotypes that many were not even aware of at all, Burnett decided that this remark from Ailes could be construed as racist by “some people.” It was clearly something about which Burnett was eager to talk as she teased the segment twice highlighting the word racist.

When she did finally get to the Ailes story, she was not nearly as casual in describing it as she had been earlier in describing Rand Paul’s concerns about civil liberties:


ERIN BURNETT: President Obama is lazy. These are the explosive comments made by Fox News chief Roger Ailes. Vanity Fair released an excerpt from a new Ailes biography in which he says, referring to a comment someone made about Ann Romney:

(Quoting from book): ‘Obama’s the one who never worked a day in his life. He never earned a penny that wasn't public money. How many fundraisers does he attend every week? How often does he play basketball and golf?

I wish I had that kind of time. He’s lazy, but the media won’t report that. I didn’t come up with that, Obama said that to Barbara Walters.’

All right, he did. And I'm going to get to that in a moment.

But the question is: are those comments racially charged or just frank talk?


Burnett then brought in conservative radio talk host Michael Medved (whom she labeled as such) and leftist political agitator Van Jones (whom she did not label) to discuss the matter.
Once again, as with the Paul story, a substantive debate followed between both sides. The only difference between the two segments was Burnett’s dismissive attitude toward a complaint of conservatives (at least until a Republican becomes president again) and her respectful attitude toward a liberal one.
This is what liberal bias in the news is all about. I do not think for a second that Burnett meant to deliberately deride Rand Paul’s concerns. But that is exactly what she did while just minutes later treating as serious the absurd proposition that the president of Fox News is a racist for quoting Obama’s own serious remarks in which he called himself lazy (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXIre_mYfig).
For those interested, here is CNN’s partial video of the Burnett-Medved-Jones discussion.
Hat tip for story and screenshot to Cole Streeper (http://www.twitter.com/colestreeper).

About the Author

Matthew Sheffield is the creator of NewsBusters and president of Dialog New Media, an internet marketing and design firm.

Click here (http://twitter.com/mattsheffield) to follow Matthew Sheffield on Twitter.

[coastie]

Where's Rand at on Google news, then? This is a screenshot from 30 seconds ago...besides the bullshit about him considering using a catheter?
http://www.picvalley.net/u/1781/130135463169757721362677065GRXRgfE8ZRPraIZTkQ0D.JP G (http://www.picvalley.net/v.php?p=u/1781/130135463169757721362677065GRXRgfE8ZRPraIZTkQ0D.JP G)

[HOLLYWOOD]

Here's Libertarian's favorite propagandist at CNN: Dana Bash interviewing Rand Paul this morning.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/03/07/rand-paul-says-hes-heard-from-white-house-after-filibuster/

[dannno]

I would have gone with the catheter.

[jllundqu]

wow-limbaugh is raving about rand- and ranting about mccain and graham. hang on....the world just turned upside down.

No way! Really???

[ZENemy]

No way! Really???

:eek:

[fisharmor]

Wow, look what happens when you stand up for the Constitution, limited government, and liberty.

This constitution that says explicitly and ad nauseum that it's ok to drone attack noncombatants in other countries without a declaration of war is one I've never read.

[ravedown]

holy shit....rand triggered something..check the front page of huffpo!!!!!

[ravedown]

holy shit....rand triggered something..check the front page of huffpo!!!!!

bump- the drone debate at the huffpo regarding the front page story is excellent-giving me hope that the dems are catching on.
btw- i dont work for huffpo-just happy to see something intelligent there for a change

[coastie]

bump- the drone debate at the huffpo regarding the front page story is excellent-giving me hope that the dems are catching on.
btw- i dont work for huffpo-just happy to see something intelligent there for a change

I have literally just almost shit myself:eek::
http://www.picvalley.net/u/2828/8050771516333305041362684639691iJK9kkkOCtntCA450.J PG (http://www.picvalley.net/v.php?p=u/2828/8050771516333305041362684639691iJK9kkkOCtntCA450.J PG)

[rubioneocon]

Now he can run for President :)

We only need to pimp the blimp next . . .

with a new paint job on half the side I guess.

http://i372.photobucket.com/albums/oo161/sunblush/jetsgame2011.jpg

[Mini-Me]

This constitution that says explicitly and ad nauseum that it's ok to drone attack noncombatants in other countries without a declaration of war is one I've never read.

This is my first post in months, because I couldn't resist posting here after such a historic filibuster. I've watched five hours so far, and it's just epic. Who ever imagined Lysander Spooner would be referenced on the Senate floor? :D He repeats himself a good bit every hour or so, but there's new material in each hour as well, and it's really quite entertaining and informative to watch. It's weird, because I briefly tuned into NPR last night on accident while I was driving in my car and searching through the radio stations. At that precise moment, they mentioned that Rand Paul was "still" filibustering in the Senate. I had no idea what it was all about, and I forgot it by the time I got home...until I followed the relevant link from Will Grigg's excellent blog:
http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/2013/03/the-stalinist-in-white-house.html
(I've been reading this lately to substitute for my old diet of AntiFederalist's posts. ;))

Anyway, I understand your frustration fisharmor, but if my memory serves me correctly, Rand never really claimed anything like that about the Constitution. (Really, the biggest objection I had was his misstep about trying people for treason for comments "sympathetic" to the enemy, but since his entire point is about trials in the first place, whatever.) His argument was pretty much always, "Okay, now signature attacks in a foreign country where we're fighting a war may be one thing, but..." He basically just left that fight for another day and explicitly said so at least once in his speech and once in his interview with Bash. That will be a harder fight to win (at least under the current circumstances), and winning this one is essentially a prerequisite to getting people thinking in Constitutional terms whatsoever. (Really, he left multiple fights for another day, including the immorality of signature attacks in war, and the unconstitutionality of considering the entire world a warzone, especially in the absence of a declared war anywhere. He did touch on related issues though, such as when he repeatedly referenced a war on terror without geographical or temporal limits, and when he brought up how he couldn't even get Senators to agree to officially end the war in Iraq by ending the authorization of force.) In other words, it was mainly a matter of selective emphasis.

Most hardcore libertarians are frankly too intelligent to natively relate to the thought processes of "normal people" or comprehend what their trouble is understanding this stuff. If we're going to create effective coalitions on critical issues like due process, we need some people around who know how to draw "normal" people in at a pace they won't reject, and Rand is very effective at that. He speaks in a language conservatives can understand, and it's something most of us are simply incapable of doing with any degree of patience, for the same reason some of his rhetoric turns us off. They're not going to be convinced by a logical argument alone though; the vast majority of people just aren't that smart. They're going to need to be seduced on an emotional level and made to feel part of something as they inch closer to our side. After all, identity politics and social rewards are everything to "normal people."

Nowadays, "normal people" often tend to reflexively retreat two steps back into hardline neoconservatism when faced with full-fledged Constitutional and especially libertarian views. The "macho flash" often backfires, as I've learned in my spare time posting on other sites trying to give libertarian views more mindshare. I hope that as "normal people" are drawn closer, one battle at a time, they will eventually be able to comprehend what we're saying in full. The truth of the matter though is we're currently so far gone that Rand Paul just had to do a 13 hour filibuster to defend perhaps the most fundamental right guaranteed by the Magna Carta 800 years ago...and he still has opposition not only in government but among the public. He drew up a tremendous amount of support, but he only did so because of his signature style that we all love to hate. Most people aren't yet ready for anything more "extreme," and even the support he's gotten is coming under heavy fire by insane Democratic partisans online (who are rallying against him out of spite) and neocon puppets like McCain and Graham.

We need people like Ron Paul, because only firebrands who fearlessly speak truth to power can ignite a movement and accomplish what he has accomplished over the past few years. We also need people like Rand Paul, because only firebrands who know how to pick the right battles at the right time can pull people who "still don't get it" close enough that they finally become more receptive. After the awe-inspiring spectacle of yesterday, it's my hope that we can all come to a more patient understanding that we all play different roles in the fight for liberty, and that's okay. :)

[CPUd]

Transcript of the first 7 hrs:

http://www.paul.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=727 hour 1
http://www.paul.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=728 hour 2
http://www.paul.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=729 hour 3
http://www.paul.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=730 hour 4
http://www.paul.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=731 hour 5
http://www.paul.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=732 hour 6
http://www.paul.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=733 hour 7

[Mini-Me]

I want to know where hours 10, 11, 12, and 13 are! AFDSFKSKFaafkjsdaf!!!!

I mean, I've only watched the first 5, but the time will come when I need the rest. NEEEEEED.