TSA turns away Sen. Rand Paul at airport checkpoint

  • Thread starter Thread starter News Feed
  • Start date Start date
N

News Feed

Guest
Authorities blocked U.S. Sen. Rand Paul at the Nashville airport Monday after the Kentucky Republican refused a pat-down at a security checkpoint, his spokeswoman said.

EeydPKzuqlg


Continue reading...
 
"Is it too much to ask to have a little dignity when you travel? And shouldn't an adult be able to get back in line and go through the scanner?" he told CNN. "I don't think that's too much to ask."
yup
He was eventually rebooked on another Washington-bound flight, saying that time the screener did not go off when he went through it.

"It tells me that either the machines are inadequate, or they are not telling us the whole story," said Paul, insisting that two TSA agents told him that the screeners go off randomly -- an assertion the federal agency denies.
inconsistency is one reason I don't trust this entire process
 
Good! Hopefully TSA does this to more elected officals and the result is to destroy the TSA along with the rest of the Patriot Act.
 
Lets see which Progressive establishment supports the Patriot Act and the NDAA :


402393_331150373584868_259478574085382_1047948_365537281_n.jpg
 
Lets see which Progressive establishment supports the Patriot Act and the NDAA :


402393_331150373584868_259478574085382_1047948_365537281_n.jpg

His position on the Patriot Act and the NDAA are exactly the same as all of the current crop of GOP presidential hopefuls - except Ron Paul, of course, who opposes both.

Obama's big donor list is exactly the same as Romney's. But you would rather support the Establishment than someone who loves liberty and the Constitution, because you are afraid that he might be owned by a wealthy businessman who helped bring down Communism in Eastern Europe.
 

Good poster and pretty much bang on. The trouble is that you somehow think this makes him worse than who you'll vote for.

And bombing 6 sovereign countries?
I am just trying to imagine you criticising a Republican for such an act......

..... nope - can't quite imagine it.
 
I didn't know Obama was thinking of running for the GOP nomination. That's a pretty good resume for them.
 
Good poster and pretty much bang on. The trouble is that you somehow think this makes him worse than who you'll vote for.

And bombing 6 sovereign countries?
I am just trying to imagine you criticising a Republican for such an act......

..... nope - can't quite imagine it.

I can, there was no reason for Libya. Dropping a hellfire on that traitor, I don't mind it happened, but be as that may, I do have issues on how it was allowed and the system now in place to allow it to happen again. If Bush had done this, Progressive would be all going full blown rabid mode demanding he be arrested, let alone impeached. What has happened since it was Obama? I hear crickets chirping.
 
I can, there was no reason for Libya. Dropping a hellfire on that traitor, I don't mind it happened, but be as that may, I do have issues on how it was allowed and the system now in place to allow it to happen again. If Bush had done this, Progressive would be all going full blown rabid mode demanding he be arrested, let alone impeached. What has happened since it was Obama? I hear crickets chirping.
We had a protest here in Minnesota. Really, your lack of knowledge is not he same as lack of action. Check out the US Protests documented in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_the_2011_military_intervention_in_Libya

As for Obama that horrid progressive. I must agree with others EVERY viable Republican Presidential candidate agrees with this crap. It had overwhelming Republican support in Congress and it Republican that put the final stamp on it first putting it into office. There are no differences here between Dems and Republicans.
 
We had a protest here in Minnesota. Really, your lack of knowledge is not he same as lack of action. Check out the US Protests documented in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_the_2011_military_intervention_in_Libya

That made it to the nightly news, oh wait...

As for Obama that horrid progressive. I must agree with others EVERY viable Republican Presidential candidate agrees with this crap. It had overwhelming Republican support in Congress and it Republican that put the final stamp on it first putting it into office. There are no differences here between Dems and Republicans.

What is running in the GOP field, I have to mostly agree with that. I mean it's obvious that Ron Paul is in Soros' pocket, so he is lumped into it as well. As I pointed out in the other thread, I'm not too happy with my choices next week. The only reason I'm going is a protest vote against the GOP elite (who are owned by the global elite, who also owns the Democrat National Party) with someone they don't like and I'm barely care about his stances.

2012 is going to be a Marxist vs a Socialist as America implodes. Joy!
 
I can, there was no reason for Libya.

So, run this one by me again: How does this equate to criticising a Republican for attacking a sovereign nation?
If that had been Bush, you'd have cheered him on. That was part of my point and you've just reinforced it.

Dropping a hellfire on that traitor, I don't mind it happened, but be as that may, I do have issues on how it was allowed and the system now in place to allow it to happen again. If Bush had done this, Progressive would be all going full blown rabid mode demanding he be arrested, let alone impeached. What has happened since it was Obama? I hear crickets chirping.

Again you demonstrate that you only disagree with attacking sovereign nations if there's a Democrat in the white house.

If a Republican wins in November and attacks another sovereign nation, you will perform whatever mental gymnastics are required to justify it, not only to others but to yourself.
Of that there is little doubt.
 
If Bush had done this, Progressive would be all going full blown rabid mode demanding he be arrested, let alone impeached. What has happened since it was Obama? I hear crickets chirping.

Since the Neocons kicked off the whole transformation of America starting on 9/11, the Imperialists have taken over the news supply. You will not see or hear of protests not sanctioned by the Imperialists unless there is some violence to scare you with or some hippies to make fun of.
 
I must agree with others EVERY viable Republican Presidential candidate agrees with this crap.

If all the media outlets actually just admit that Ron Paul IS viable and stop trying to exclude him then he WOULD be viable. The Imperialist owned media does NOT like his message and so will ignore it or deride it. Ron Paul has money and organization in every state and he has real live human beings who show up for him who don't need to be paid to do so. He really is viable but the media owners are in the business of war and finance and they will try to convince voters that a vote for any candidate who isn't good for finance and war is a wasted vote and that people should vote strategically instead.
 
The only reason I'm going is a protest vote against the GOP elite (who are owned by the global elite, who also owns the Democrat National Party) with someone they don't like and I'm barely care about his stances.

To protest the GOP elite you will vote for a candidate that they approve of rather than the only candidate who is not owned by the elite - because you think Soros owns him - and Soros is the global elite so he already owns the GOP.
 
To protest the GOP elite you will vote for a candidate that they approve of rather than the only candidate who is not owned by the elite - because you think Soros owns him - and Soros is the global elite so he already owns the GOP.

Logic!
 
I can, there was no reason for Libya. Dropping a hellfire on that traitor, I don't mind it happened, but be as that may, I do have issues on how it was allowed and the system now in place to allow it to happen again. If Bush had done this, Progressive would be all going full blown rabid mode demanding he be arrested, let alone impeached. What has happened since it was Obama? I hear crickets chirping.
So I guess you were all for impeaching Ronald Reagan when he bombed Libya?
 
Again you demonstrate that you only disagree with attacking sovereign nations if there's a Democrat in the white house.
Perhaps it's the UN he hates. Illegally invading a nation like Iraq without the support on the UN is probably fine. Taking a small part in a UN mission is the greater sin. That fits into his NWO conspiracy nonsense.
 
Perhaps it's the UN he hates. Illegally invading a nation like Iraq without the support on the UN is probably fine. Taking a small part in a UN mission is the greater sin. That fits into his NWO conspiracy nonsense.

You might be onto something there. :D
 

In an era when special interests funnel huge amounts of money into our government-driven by shifts in campaign-finance rules and brought to new levels by the Supreme Court in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission-trust in our government has reached an all-time low. More than ever before, Americans believe that money buys results in Congress, and that business interests wield control over our legislature.

With heartfelt urgency and a keen desire for righting wrongs, Harvard law professor Lawrence Lessig takes a clear-eyed look at how we arrived at this crisis: how fundamentally good people, with good intentions, have allowed our democracy to be co-opted by outside interests, and how this exploitation has become entrenched in the system. Rejecting simple labels and reductive logic-and instead using examples that resonate as powerfully on the Right as on the Left-Lessig seeks out the root causes of our situation. He plumbs the issues of campaign financing and corporate lobbying, revealing the human faces and follies that have allowed corruption to take such a foothold in our system. He puts the issues in terms that nonwonks can understand, using real-world analogies and real human stories. And ultimately he calls for widespread mobilization and a new Constitutional Convention, presenting achievable solutions for regaining control of our corrupted-but redeemable-representational system. In this way, Lessig plots a roadmap for returning our republic to its intended greatness.

While America may be divided, Lessig vividly champions the idea that we can succeed if we accept that corruption is our common enemy and that we must find a way to fight against it. In Republic, Lost, he not only makes this need palpable and clear-he gives us the practical and intellectual tools to do something about it.
 
Back
Top