“Mr. Wheeler, if 90% of your constituents wanted you to vote to raise taxes by 4 points on those making over $200k, would you do it?”
“Fuuuuck no! Have you never read Burke?”
I fully support Rand Paul linking himself to the incredibly unpopular Cucinelli. It can only help his 2016 campaign, right?
Someone really oughta tell him that the “obstruct EVERYTHING” strategy only applies to Mr. Obama.
Also that it doesn’t seem to be working all that well anyway.
That makes as much sense as Cruz voting *for *cloture on the bill he was filibustering.
That’s actually exactly why he’s obstructing them. He was in favor of his bill and his nominee until he found out Obama was in favor of them too.
Rand Paul: Speeches copied from Wikipedia; hairstyle copied from James Traficant.
Yep. He fits this description to a tee:
[QUOTE=H. L. Mencken]
The typical lawmaker of today is a man wholly devoid of principle – a mere counter in a grotesque and knavish game. If the right pressure could be applied to him he would be cheerfully in favor of polygamy, astrology or cannibalism.
[/QUOTE]
Headline of article: “Rand Paul mum after plagiarism allegations”
Perhaps he was mum because he could find someone to copy a response from.
That’s not a nice thing to say about anybody’s mum.
This can’t help his chances with the base. They’re bound to demand to know why he’d plagiarize a liberal cesspool like Wikipedia.
Well, if he used a speechwriter, he can just say that he learned everything he knows about politics from his father…
It was not a poor analogy at all, it was a backdoor way for him to support slavery and have plausible deniability. No non-racist person says they’d vote for slavery even if they disagree with it because their braindead constituents wanted it. A person who’s not racist, of solid moral character, and just not a pandering Republican jackhole would say they would never vote for slavery even if their constituents demanded it. That’s not being a good leader, a good person, or a good politician.
The people elected him to be knowledgeable in things they can’t be, to make the decisions they can’t. If I were part of the intelligence committee and knew information that would cause me to support things contrary to what my constituents want, then I would vote against what they want and vote my conscience. You don’t let ignorant people dictate your vote simply because they are large in number
Gun control, while controversial, is not a settled moral issue with one correct side. The educated mind is able to differentiate between what is settled dogma or a continuing ideological fight. Slavery is settled, it is always bad, there is no good slaver that exists today. No one from this point on should ever support it especially so casually because of votes
Gun control is settled in the most advanced nations (e.g. G7 etc.) with the exception of the USA, the same way that slavery was settled by the most advanced nations prior it being settled in the USA.
If he’d plagarized from Conservapedia, the risk of getting caught by one of its half-dozen readers would have been much less.
“You can always count on Americans to do the right thing – after they’ve tried everything else.” ~~attributed to Winston Churchill.
“Misattributed” may have been a more apt choice of words.
But well done on acknowledging that it only has standing as an attribution, and not a quote. 
But this one’s for real:
Lady Astor once said to Churchill, “If you were my husband, Winston, I would put poison in your tea!”
And Churchill, never at a loss, riposted, “And if you were my wife, I’d beat the shit out of you!”
And let’s not forget his immortal words after the darkest days of the Battle of Britain," Never have so many freeloaders done so much, for so few…" or something along those lines.
Oscar Wilde once sent Churchill a note: “Enclosed are two tickets to the premier performance of my new play. Bring a friend, if you have one.”
Churchill wrote back, “You and your play can both go fuck yourselves.”
“Which is illegal, so you’ll be arrested again.”