Rand Paul: Hillary Clinton ‘Should Never Hold High Office Again’

[ProSense]

Rand Paul: Hillary Clinton ‘Should Never Hold High Office Again’

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) argued Friday that the Hillary Clinton's failure to send extra security to the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya ahead of last September's attacks make her unsuited to hold higher office.

"The new evidence we have today — and that continues to mount — suggests that at the very least, Mrs. Clinton should never hold high office again," Paul wrote in an op-ed for the Washington Times.

Paul likened the Benghazi incident to the Battle of Mogadishu in Somalia (aka Black Hawk Down), in which American soldiers were killed after then-Secretary of Defense Les Aspin denied requests for increased security. Aspin announced his resignation months later.

Aspin resigned over Black Hawk Down. The same precedent should have applied apply to Mrs. Clinton. To date, no one has ultimately taken responsibility for Benghazi.

My office is currently seeking out the witnesses and survivors of Benghazi to testify before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. To date, the Obama administration has refused to let them testify.

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/rand-paul-hillary-clinton-should-never-hold-high

Dear Useless Republicans, please STFU on Benghazi
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022815985

Disappointing those who 'stand with Rand'
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022742805

[Erose999]

1. Randroid should never have held high office to begin with. In the name of AquaBuddha,

fuck that shiteating slug, and the headstomping goons who voted for him.

[Renew Deal]

2. Good luck with that

[The Magistrate]

3. Reptile Thinks He Will Run For President On This, Ma'am...

"What a nimrod! What a ultra-maroon!"

[Bake]

4. Bake: Rand Paul should never hold ANY office again.

I"m from KY so I'm eminently qualified to say that. He's my -- gag -- Senator.

Bake

[JohnnyLib2]

16. Seconded by another appalled Kentuckian.

[Initech]

5. Rand Paul should never hold any office, ever. Fuck him!

[graham4anything]

6. to responders of the OP (not the OP)-Either support Hillary Clinton or support Rand Paul.

to the responders of the OP here
either support HIllary or support Rand Paul

calling rand names, saying he should or shouldn't

either one has the back of the Democratic party, or one doesn't

Hillary,whether you like her or not IS THE FUTURE OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY

should Rand and the repubs take her down, the republican party will win all three branches

It's time to put up and either back her or you are 100% saying you support what will happen afterward.

Any fracture leads to other.

BTW progressives-do you think a republican run senate will keep Elizabeth Warren in her position of importance and do anything?

[cali]

8. trust you to write a post scolding people for something they haven't done. disgusting bullshit.

furthermore, you don't have a crystal ball, dearie so you don't fucking know if she's going to run. grab a clue. just a tiny one. just once.

[graham4anything]

13. Yeah, adhominem me and not back YOUR SOS in YOUR party (if the democratic party is yours).

Fun and games is over
actions=consequences

people attempting to take down the party are votes for the republican party

one can empower them or stick together

2014 and 2016 will be dependent on it

Maybe if President Obama and Hillary are taken down, every single Hillary and Obama supporter should act immature like their haters do.But of course, 95% of the party(all the Hillary and Obama supporters, actually care and are not attempting the burn it down).

How would a 100% republican world suit you?

Fracutre plays into their hands.

It should be election season NOW not only after labor Day.

What were the people of Kentucky thinking?

[tridim]

11. Nobody is going to join your 100% club dude.

[bravenak]

34. Right.

We ain't republicans.

[hughee99]

24. I don't believe I'm required to support either of them. n/t

[graham4anything]

26. Come Labor Day. 2016 you are according to the rules.

I don't whine, but I wish it were election season 24/7/365

[hughee99]

28. Why? I don't support repukes and Clinton won't still be running for anything.

I'm not required to support Dems that didn't run at all or didn't make it out of the primaries.

[graham4anything]

33. Why won't see be running?

are those willing to roll the dice and think 80% of the party are going to wait 20 hours to vote on election day if they are slapped down yet again prior?

I will vote for anyone with the democratic name on it.
However, are you willing to bet enough others will?

It's not like Bernie Sanders would get more than a few thousand votes out of 320 million voters.

[hughee99]

38. People come out to vote for candidates they are excited about.

Not nearly enough people are excited about Clinton. She's been in DC for more than 20 years, and after the next 2+ years of her playing coy about whether she'll run or not, people aren't going to be MORE excited about their potential 69 year old presidential candidate.

I could EASILY see her "will she or won't she come back" turn into the Brett Favre saga where after a month or two people of media attention, people just start saying "who cares".

[bravenak]

32. What you talkin bout Willis?

If she is the best candidate the majority of the party will support her.
To suggest she is the future?
Maybe,maybe not,who's to say?
We're not prescient.
We ain't gotta tow the line till after primaries.
I want a selection of good candidates to choose from.
Better democrats.
We should try that.

[NCTraveler]

46. "Hillary,whether you like her or not IS THE FUTURE OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY"

I love Hillary and I know this is not accurate. She is not the future of the party. She has been a dedicated fighter for the party for a long time. It is now time for a new crop. I think the younger generation of Democrats will be much less hawkish. They will also be much more progressive when it comes to human rights. Though I do think she takes a better stand there than most.

The one thing that could get me to support her if she made it out of the primary is the fact that we could possibly see the most divisive battles between the republicans and Democrats in history. Yes, that is something I actually want. More progressive positions win out in the end.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

47. Sorry, Loyalty Oaths are soooo 1950's.

I don't "support" Republicans or 3rd Way Democrats.

[Tanuki]

7. Spoken like the coward he is,

scared to run against her.

[BlueCaliDem]

9. Hillary Clinton can easily slap the boy upside his head, take his lunch money, and send him on his

way with a swift boot to his behind - all metaphorically speaking, of course. This little man is way out of his league here.

If it wasn't for corporate money and gullible-hate-black-people-that's-why-they-don't-vote-"Democrat" Kentuckians, Randy wouldn't have even come close to being a U.S. Senator. I guess it's easy-breezy to get elected in a Red welfare state where corporations control the messaging because, voila, there that little man sits - in the United States Senate, for chrissakes.

But fact remains, he doesn't have the brains or intellect to go toe-to-toe with Hillary Clinton and he certainly can't come anywhere near the Major Leagues. He's only useful to treasonous U.S. corporations who will use him as a decoy while they try and slip another Bush on this country. So the little pansy should stfu. He doesn't have the credibility to decide who should or who shouldn't hold higher office.

[graham4anything]

30. Sure wish some others here would understand the last paragraph

It isn't about Rand, even if he don't know it.

[BlueCaliDem]

41. Yep. Randy is the shining thing they point at while they slip in another Bush

or corporate shill through the primaries and into the general election. I always thought Liberals and Progressives understood that the moneyed Powers-That-Be don't want Randy. They know he's dumb as a box of bricks, but so are his followers. They want a corporate manchurian candidate - like Reagan, GWBush, and Mittney. GHWBush didn't play ball and he was booted out pretty quickly, serving only one term. I have no love for Poppy Bush, but he *did* govern much differently than his simple son.

The "divide and conquer" strategy hasn't changed for the elite: it is still a very successful strategy, hence Nader who was funded in both 2000 and 2004 by GOP donators. For all his railing against being bought by corporations, Nader never excused accepting money from those same sources, saying that he has to accept the money in order to run until he can (he can?) pass election finance reform. Yeah, right. As if the president has that power.

That's why Nader has always been a fake to me. He's smart enough to know that the president can only get laws passed IF and WHEN Congress agrees to, and he's never held elective office. Why would any American want to waste their vote on him? Congress would make a lame-duck president out of Nader had he somehow found himself in the WH. Look at the power they wield on President Obama. If ever we needed proof that Congress is the most powerful branch of our government, President Obama's presidency proves it beyond any doubt.

[unblock]

10. fair enough. shrub and cheney resigned over 9/11.

oh wait, no, they didn't.

[Buzz Clik]

12. I liked his dad. Rand is a prick.

[graham4anything]

15. You liked his dad Ron Paul? that is NOT something for a democratic party board

no, a clock is not always right twice a day and Ron Paul was 100% a republican his entire life.

NEVER a democratic party person. NEVER

[Buzz Clik]

18. I was not referring to his politics. (There is no Prick Party)

The Libertarian Party embraces some ideals we like (no war, legalize marijuana, for instance), but they tend to a lot of loony crap that the extreme right finds awesome, like no restrictions on guns, no taxes, no regulations.

You can be a Libertarian and not a toad personally. Ron Paul strikes me as a nice person. Rand Paul is a prick.

[graham4anything]

19. Ron Paul is a John Birch Society/David Duke supporter and has NO place in the Dem.Party.

80% of the democratic support is from minorities, women and Ron Paul is against power for any of those 80%.

[Buzz Clik]

22. Why are you lecturing me?

Back the hell off, okay?

I never suggested he run for VP with Hillary in 2016.

Jesus H.

[graham4anything]

25. What?You said you supported Ron Paul. No democratic person should support a racist like Paul

who is talking about Ron being anything but a KKK without a sheet like his son is.

George Wallace was a democrat in name and a racist in trade.An incredibly evil despicable
person who fractured the democratic party.

Racists and homophobes and sexists have no place in the 2013 world.

Only reason ron paul /rand paul wants drugs legalized is to get Democratic support and fracture the dems to support republicans and his lifestyle.

[Buzz Clik]

31. Holy shit. What a remarkable temper tantrum. Would you mind reading what I said?

I said I like him as a person, not as a politician. Yeah, I've met him. Yes, I talked to him for a while. He was genuinely nice.

I'm sorry he's a flashpoint for you and the mention of his name sends you into a high orbit, but that's your problem, not mine.

Here's another log for your emotionally bonfire: I voted for him in 1988.

[graham4anything]

37. Yeah, we already know that.

My aunt, who passed away this year was NOT generally nice.(though I was on her good list).

However, she was far more qualified to be president or anything else than either Rand or Ron, and didn't take to fools like them nicely.

(Of course, she was forced out of Austria by someone quite like the Ron Paul that most people never saw because he hid it well nationally.)

Google Jorg Haider and see the politically and personal clone of Rand Paul.
Not just in looks, but in reason for being.

You are free to vote for anyone you choose.

But then don't complain about anything Bush41 did from 1989-1993.
Because as you said, you voted for Ron Paul.

[Ikonoklast]

39. Ron Paul was a racist in 1988, just as he is now.

And confirms what many here have suspected for years.

[Buzz Clik]

42. It's good to hear you have good intuition.

[Blue_Tires]

35. But Paul to my knowledge was never a true libertarian

just a no-name inconsequential republican from some podunk congressional district, with *some* libertarian ideas, a bunch of meaningless symbolic votes, and a history of racist rhetoric...

Of course in the twilight of his career he suddenly embraces reefer decriminalization and pulling out of the Middle East so College Dems and internet activists make him an overnight rock star...

[hrmjustin]

14. He seems like a frustrated person.

[JoePhilly]

17. Hillary terrifies him.

[graham4anything]

21. Hillary terrifies all of the haters. Because she is unstoppable and in general to Rand & Ron-

to Rand and Ron, she is also a woman, and a woman in power terrorizes them

same as any minority does.

When only 30% of a state votes, they get the extremists.

[lumberjack_jeff]

20. So that's what this was all about.

It was the first attack ad of 2016.

[Little Star]

23. Buy that boy some diapers cause he's pissing his pants at the thought of HRC2016. n/t

[Poll_Blind]

27. LOL! The FAIL-pot calling the FAIL-kettle FAIL.

PB

[Blue Owl]

29. All those home perms have fried Rand Paul's brain

n/t

[bravenak]

36. This man is not worth our time.

I'll never forget him on Rachel Maddow being an idiot. Or how he likes to go to historically back colleges to lecture black students about civil rights .
Hillary would make him cry in a debate .

[Zoeisright]

40. Fuck off, Rand.

You filthy piece of lying shit. You aren't worthy of the post of dog catcher.

[MzShellG]

43. They plan to use Benghazi as an albatross around Hillary's neck....

It will be an issue in 2016. Question is, will it work?

[City Lights]

44. She scares the crap out of them.

That's why they're bending over backwards to try and destroy her credibility.

[AgingAmerican]

45. Repubicans have blown their wad too early on this one

Wonder what their next phony scandal will be?