Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Kudos to Rand Paul

Just as last week when Rand Paul had to eat his words when he said Republican hawks created ISIS...today he had to back off again.

Sunday night: “People here in town think I’m making a huge mistake,” Paul said. “Some of them, I think, secretly want there to be an attack on the United States so they can blame it on me.”

Monday morning: “I think by calling it hyperbole, that means I may well have exaggerated the case.”

Just another example of how a Paul in the White House would damage Nat'l Security and our gov's ability to defend our freedom and spread democracy across the globe.

We're all in danger as a result, and need to make sure to elect someone who will increase gov oversight of our dangerous use of freedom, and to enforce democratic ideals abroad by all means necessary.

-RNC/Bowsinger

So what was Bush thinking when he signed it? Different intent?

I think it was a different intent at the time after 9/11 when Americans were screaming for the Govt. to protect them from further terrorist attacks.

I doubt he even knew it would be as encompassing as it was...It was just a tool.

But as with ANY tool, it can become dangerous in the wrong hands. Which is what has happened in the past 6 1/2 years.

The bottom line is we need to violate American's civil rights to provide for a secure country as it stands today, unbridled immigration..

The country has this open door policy so the status quo can remain in power through cheap labor and ignorant third world voters.

This is the price we must all pay for the "chance" to live this American dream..you know, giving a $200,000 speech or golfing while your wetbacks are hard at it.

The America of "success through hard work" has been replaced by success through politics. Enjoy, it only cost you your civil rights.

I like Paul ,I'm tired of the same old leftest chit , now linsey gramnaste..is in the ring ....f. Him !

yUP....I told you all months ago he ain't perfect but he's heads above the whores that call themselves Democrats and Republicans.

there are some that are completely ok to the idea that violating the constitution is perfectly OK in the name of safety when it comes to illegal search and seizure - just because some politician tells them it needs to happen to stop terrorists

but they'd stop drinking coffee if Starbucks banned guns at their stores.

I don't get it - you'd think we'd all be in favor of protecting our constitutional rights and understanding politicians lie.

The ironic thing about this thread is how so many here fail to see the direct connection between Paul's stance here and those so often denounced here as "dangerous" in his foreign policy.

There are reasons why Dems & Reps agree on this bill AND upon International Interventionist "Busy-Body-Ism". The two things are attached at the hip; the willingness of our government to "oversee" our exercise of freedom and its willingness to over extend our military as a means of enforcing its influence abroad. You can't have one without the other.

Either way you're supporting an unsustainable model of governance that is antithetical to the right-sized government conducive to individual liberty.

I'd MUCH rather be murdered by terrorists than raped and subjugated by my gov't and I know that the latter is a very real reality that'll someday have us wishing for the former.

Yeah; just like when he campaigned against Clinton's nation building...