Rand Paul to travel on Air Force One with President Obama tomorrow

Rand needs to address something a little more urgent than a damn bridge in Kentucky, are you f'ing kidding me?

He's got a one-on-one with the President in an isolated environment and he wants to talk about a bridge. FACEPALMS.

How about the wars?
How about the Federal Reserve?
How about the inflation tax?
How about the media censorship of his father?
How about the disease of Collectivism that is ruining our countries society?
How about the Police who kick our doors down no different than the soldiers do in Iraq?
How about the TSA?

Should I go on? Or have I already made my point pretty clear.
Obama has no power (legitimately, at least) over whether or not the media covers Ron Paul. Rand would do well try to convince him to do something right regarding those other issues, but I can't really blame him if he doesn't think it would make a difference (which it almost certainly wouldn't).
 
Last edited:
As Ricky would say. F-
off Mr. Lahey.

Ya, fuck off!! :D


One bridge has already been shut down on a major interstate spanning the Ohio River. So I take that bridges that keep commerce flowing that is shut down due to their condition is not urgent?

Do you think the president even cares about talking to Rand about the issues you brought up? Get real dude. It would be different if POTUS actually cared about those issues. I swear people are idiots on here. Remember he is a Senator from KENTUCKY. It's not one bridge, it's actually about every bridge that spans the Ohio River that needs to be replaced.

I don't know, but it sounds like something that I, as a Californian, don't want to pay for. However I'd rather bring some foreign aid back here and use half to pay for the bridge and the other half to help pay off the national debt than send the money overseas.
 
Last edited:
They could have lunch at the olive garden BUT MICHELLE OBAMA HAD TO END THE ALL YOU CAN EAT BREAD STICKS! BLASPHEMY! WHAT A PIECE OF WORK!..
 
Press release after meeting with Obama:

Sen. Paul Unveils Emergency Transportation Safety Fund Act of 2011

Sep 22, 2011
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Today, Sen. Rand Paul traveled to Northern Kentucky with President Obama to discuss with him a plan to fix our nation's crumbling infrastructure. Before the President spoke just steps from the Brent Spence Bridge, Sen. Rand Paul unveiled to him the Emergency Transportation Safety Fund Act of 2011.

"While we are faced with a fiscal crisis, our nation also has critical infrastructure needs that demand immediate attention. The Emergency Transportation Safety Fund Act is a fiscally responsible approach to dealing with a matter of high priority," Sen. Paul said.

"This bill closes the gap in federal highway planning and funding without increasing spending and without any earmarks. We can finally fix our broken roads and bridges by freeing up funding that is used for optional projects such as scenic beautification and transportation museums," he continued. "This plan provides the necessary resources for emergency repairs and will not only save our infrastructure from collapsing but also keep our budgets from expanding."

http://paul.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=330
 
Kucinch came out a differnt person when he went on the infamous airforce one meeting to talk about obama's healthcare plan--which he was against at first.
 
Kucinch came out a differnt person when he went on the infamous airforce one meeting to talk about obama's healthcare plan--which he was against at first.

morpheus.jpg
 
Rand needs to address something a little more urgent than a damn bridge in Kentucky, are you f'ing kidding me?

He's got a one-on-one with the President in an isolated environment and he wants to talk about a bridge. FACEPALMS.

How about the wars?
How about the Federal Reserve?
How about the inflation tax?
How about the media censorship of his father?
How about the disease of Collectivism that is ruining our countries society?
How about the Police who kick our doors down no different than the soldiers do in Iraq?
How about the TSA?

Should I go on? Or have I already made my point pretty clear.

He is focusing on the bridge as an example of a larger issue.

He is bringing up one of Ron Paul's favorite points: Why are we bombing and rebuilding bridges in Iraq while our bridges fall down at home?

Rand is using this as an opportunity to point out that 2 major bridges in KY are in very poor shape yet we are giving billions to Libya, Iraq, Israel, etc.

He just proposed a bill to cut foreign aid in order to spend more at home on emergency services

This is a VERY important issue and one we can potentially win on in the long run
 
I don't know, but it sounds like something that I, as a Californian, don't want to pay for. However I'd rather bring some foreign aid back here and use half to pay for the bridge and the other half to help pay off the national debt than send the money overseas.

Rand suggested that there be a bridge/interstate priority list where they determine the places most in need of repair and address them first. We could do this far more effectively if we had all that foreign aid money back here at home
 
Didn't Hannity say last night to Ron that he was going to have Rand on his radio show today to discuss the meeting with Obama?
 
I'll give something to Rand, he is a reasonable guy, and most reasonable people think that if you can just reason with another person, you can bring them over to your point of view. I get a little of this from Rand. He wants the debate, he wants the discussion. He just doesn't know yet that he isn't going to ever get it.
 
Didn't Hannity say last night to Ron that he was going to have Rand on his radio show today to discuss the meeting with Obama?

i heard that, too.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2011/09/obama-gaffe-jobs-act-speech-brent-spence-bridge-ohio.html said:
President Obama's remarks on the American Jobs Act, as provided by the White House
THE PRESIDENT: Hello, Cincinnati! (Applause.) Well, it is good to see all of you. It is good to be back in Cincinnati. (Applause.) I have to say I drove by the Bengals’ practice -- (laughter.) And I was scouting out some plays in case they play the Bears -- (laughter.) Did I hear somebody boo the Bears?

AUDIENCE: Booo! (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT: We've got some folks I just want to make sure are acknowledged here today. First of all, the Secretary of Transportation, Ray LaHood, is in the house. Give him a round of applause. (Applause.) We've got the mayor of the great city of Cincinnati -- Mark Mallory is here. (Applause.) We've got the mayor of Covington, Mayor Denny Bowman. (Applause.) Senator Rand Paul is here.

AUDIENCE: Booo --

THE PRESIDENT: Rand is going to be supporting bridges, so we've got to -- (applause.) And we've got Congressman John Yarmuth in the house. (Applause.)

Now, it is good to be back. I was just in Columbus a little while ago, and I figured I couldn't get away with not giving Cincinnati a little bit of love. (Applause.)

...

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/was...jobs-act-speech-brent-spence-bridge-ohio.html

i thought i would share this just because its related and thought some might be interested. this link has the rest of the speech if you want to read plus some jabs at Obama. i quoted the portion i found most humorous.
 
Maybe this meeting & Rand's specific bill will give pause to some Paul family supporters that really don't understand that there are some uses for a productive Federal Gov.
 
Maybe this meeting & Rand's specific bill will give pause to some Paul family supporters that really don't understand that there are some uses for a productive Federal Gov.

I think building and repairing roads and bridges is actually a legitimate use of the commerce clause of the Constitution. The federal government can't "promote free trade among the states" if there aren't roads to transport those goods on. Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution also authorizes "post offices and post roads." So that's two different places in Article 1 Section 8 that seem to give the federal government at least some authority to be involved in transportation. I think the Department of Transportation should be downsized, but not completely eliminated. It's one of the very few federal departments that actually has a Constitutional basis.
 
why can't Kentucky pay to repair their own bridge?

I think Rand is trying to get voters to think a little differently and also continuously put status quo politicians on the spot. Rand's angle here, I believe, is to get people to see that there are alternatives. So, Rand has created a bill that uses money that would otherwise be used for foreign aid to fix domestic infrastructure. This seems reasonable to almost everyone and helps cast foreign aid in a bad light. Rand is very subtle at first. He is building a new dialog and changing minds.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top