Wednesday, January 23, 2013

Rand Paul to Hillary: I Would Have Fired You

The First Rand Paul-Hillary Clinton 2016 Presidential general election debate has taken place.

Senator Rand Paul questions Defense Secretary Hillary Clinton about Benghazi and tells her (hee,hee) that if he were president he would have fired her.

(ht Travis Holte)


  1. is Hilary smirking because she knows he doesn't have a hope in hell.

    1. She's smirking because she knows Rand, if elected president, is going to end up being the same slimy protector of his staff and other cronies that Obama and Bush and most presidents were.

  2. This performance seems to serve Hilary's candidacy for 2016, not Rand's.

  3. Yet again Rand shows how different he is from his father. Ron would have used the opportunity to ask hillary why the attacks took place, why we are involved in various revolutions and arming al queda linked terrorists with the same rifles Obama and the dems want banned here for private citizens, the impact of the drone strike war on civilians, and basically the entire concept of interventionism and blowback instead of a Donald Trump bs line that only looks good on foxnews and neo-con radio.

  4. This is not about politics. It's about treason.

    1. Who is acting treasonously? Hillary? Because our government didn't protect diplomats overseas? If so, I would say that if an American chooses a career in government "diplomacy" that takes one overseas, then you're at your own risk. There shouldn't be any government diplomats going to foreign lands anyway.

      Anonymous 1:33 is making the case for government policies whose implementation and effects go totally contrary to Americans' own interests, and those policies could be considered "treasonous," in my opinion.

    2. Nationalism, national "interests" and glorification of the state, are mental diseases. And therefor so is the concept of "treason".

    3. The word "treason" is overused.
      Article III section 3 defines treason:

      "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court."

      So if we go by the relevant legal definition, I don't think Benghazi would count, but providing money and weapons to Al Qaeda in one country while they are a declared enemy that we are fighting in another certainly seems to apply.

  5. While I (generally) agree with Anon's take at 1:33pm, Rand still makes some salient points, especially w/r/t the culture of accountablility in DC; people are more than willing to take responsibility, and since no one fires members of the elite (this is true in military circles, too; getting fired for incompetence rarely happens anymore compared to, say, Vietnam), give me all the responsibility you want! Nothing bad will come from it if I fail. Pure pablum, and Rand is right to focus on it as well. Hillary *should* be fired (if not for this, for anything else you want). But she is plugged in, a (former) rival to the current guy who wanted a second term, so...feel free to f**k up all you want. It's a joke. It really does show the decadence to which this empire has fallen into.

  6. She accepts responsibility for failure, which in government, is really success. They might replace people. Then they'll get more funding created out of nothing or borrow it. They'll hire more people to make more mistakes, especially as the wars in the Middle East expand.

    Anon@ 1:33 is correct. Ron Paul would basically ask, why aren't we packing our shit and coming home?

  7. How the exchamge should've went...

    Rand Paul: I would've fired you

    Hillary Clinton: You would've never hired me

  8. What a shocker that the "independent review panel" found that the responsibility lay at the ASSISTANT Secretary level and BELOW.

    It really says it all, doesn't it? Who the hell is taking responsibility? That crone sure as hell isn't. To the contrary, she made sure to point out that she is indeed the secretary of state, so she is above responsibility. And that is government for you. The higher up you get, the less responsibility and liability you have.

    As for the Rand/Ron comparison. It is true that Ron would have focused on the more ideological points, for good reasons. Nevertheless, it is somewhat refreshing to listen to Rand's straight talk too. He is not his father, but who is? I have my problems with Rand, many of them, but I actually enjoyed this exchange. Personally, I don't think Hillary enjoyed it very much.

  9. Bob, can we stop riding Rand's nuts now? He's not an Austrian, and not a Libertarian. I think the would Tom Woods has more of a valid reason to look at, than watching statists go at each other.

  10. Hillary smiles because she's a seasoned battle axe not at all afraid of Randy Boy.

    Benghazi hearings are a joke. Congress should have put the smackdown on the White House for the military intervention in Libya which begot the chaos leading to Benghazi.

  11. Hillary stated she believes in transparency. That might be the funniest thing I've heard in a long time. I have this "revolutionary" idea to prevent any further tragedies...bring all our troops, etc. home.

  12. Will someone tell me what this dog 'n pony show was for? I mean, the dog called in sick and the pony was unavailable for comment.

    Were any questions answered?
    "WOW! Rand would have FIRED her!" Good theater Rand.
    "Back to the point. Is there a question to be answered anywhere in all of this verbiage?" No.

    Shall we go through the checklist?
    1. The House: Hopelessly compromised.
    2. Senate: Ditto.
    3. Presidency: "You have to ask?" Done. Finished. Over.
    4. Supreme Court? Hopeless and then hopelessly compromised.

    What remains? THE MILITARY? Are you NUTS?!??

    It's all hanging by a thread. The Benghazi Show was, like all "Shows", presented AS IF there was a thread of morality by which the proceedings would be understood. There exists no such thread.

    Hillary stated, "What's the difference?"



  13. Rand Paul wants to increase military spending