Ted Cruz Reads Tweets #StandWithRand from Senate Floor: Other Republicans Dine with Obama at HOTEL

Senator Rand Paul has been speaking on the Senate floor now for about 12 hours, filibustering the confirmation vote for confirmation of John Brennan to head the CIA. In the video below, Senator Ted Cruz is reading Tweets in support of Senator Paul #StandWithRand. The confirmation filibuster includes Attorney General Eric Holder telling Senator Cruz that yes, the president can kill an American sitting in a coffee shop, and yes it is unconstitutional. Paul wants answers from the White House. Some others have stood in for Senator Paul today for very short periods, while other Republicans dined with Obama at a the Jefferson Hotel:

Rand Paul

Rand Paul

They included Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who lost the 2008 presidential election to Obama; Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.; Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., Sen. John Hoeven, R-N.D.; Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa.; Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C.; and Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis. Source USA Today

Notice Mitch McConnell didn’t get an invite.

I’d love to awaken in the morning to news that each of the above mentioned left the Jefferson, walked to the Senate floor to help carry on the filibuster with Senator Paul. The confirmation vote is scheduled for Thursday, March 8th. Senator Rand Paul is making modern-day history today and for as long as his voice and legs will hold him.

No, I’m not over Paul voting for Hagel but he’s making a strong stand today. I wish others would join him.


Senator Ted Cruz Reads #IStandWithRand Tweets on Senate Floor

  • Excellent vid. Good post and great leaders. It’s about time we stood up to Obama’s overreach.

  • Our 2012 new faces on The Hill got more real fight in ’em than the 2010 Tea Party ones… I’m delighted with Cruz and Rand Paul so far, except RP caved on Hagel, not sure what happened there

    • Reaganite Republican, the Tea Party put them there, but now these different factions have become a mess. I’m disappointed in the Hagel vote. I do fear it is signs of anti-Semitism. Nothing else makes sense. This cannot be about the President having “leeway” for his nominees. If that’s what it’s about, why ever have a confirmation vote.?Love Cruz and numerous others. After the CPAC news, I think the TeaParty is falling apart or joining hands with the wrong people – at least some of them.

  • Geo

    It’s about time some Republicans showed some backbone and stood up for the Constitution and the rule of law. Sadly I’m afraid that he probably go and vote for Brennan as he did for Hagel. If ever there was a argument against the line “that the President gets to pick his appointments” with the opposing party just going along, these two nominations blow that argument completely out of the water. These two are the poster boys against it.

    All while the “dynamic duo” [McCain and Graham] of “Team Schmucky” are cavorting with the White House attending the “divide and conquer” dinner. Cutting a deal that is going to not only sell out Republicans, but the Nation also.

    Get ready for the big announcement any day now from Team Schmucky and the White House that a huge bipartisan deal has been reached on Illegal Immigration and more Gun Control. Prepare yourself, it’s coming.

    • Geo, I don’t know if you saw my post on Al Cardenas, American Conservative Union, saying that CPAC this year will be used to “stimulate the conservative electorate” to give “immediate access to 11M for residency and citizenship.” You can read it here.. The push for the kind of immigration we do not want begins at CPAC.

      • Geo

        Maggie, I saw that yesterday. Very disappointing but it seems that it’s the tidal wave taken over the elitist, rino, members of the party and seems to have infected other promising individuals. It is out and out pandering, that won’t get them not one more Hispanic vote in the future. I guess they haven’t learned anything from the 1986 debacle and are intent to repeat the mistake by doubling down.

        If they continue on this path, they’ll end up with the same faith of the Whig Party. Given the current members involved, it wouldn’t disappoint me in the least.

  • AnnS

    I wouldn’t gush too much over Rand just yet. Has any one brought up that Brennan converted to Islam. Imagine this as a CIA director:

    “As a Muslim, Guandolo said, Brennan became friendly with members of
    Hamas, designated a terrorist group by the State Department. Brennan, meant
    to succeed David Petraeus, has also deemed the Iranian-sponsored Hizbullah a
    political group that could be swayed to stop attacks on Western interests.
    “He has interwoven his life professionally and personally with
    individuals that we know are terrorists,” Guandolo said. “He has given them
    access to the National Security Council and National Security [Council


    • AnnS, I don’t gush over Paul. If you read the article you would see where I said I’m not over his Hagel vote yet (and I probably will never be over it) nevertheless he deserves credit for what he did. More on him here.

      I’ve written about Brennan many times, including the possible CIA conversion. If you click that link you’ll see 8 other articles and that’s not all of them. I’ve talked about him over and over.

    • Geo

      AnnS, I always use measured accolades when it comes to Rand Paul, I’m usually waiting for the “father factor” to kick in with him. However I must say that haven listened to him from the time he was a candidate for the Senate seat in Kentucky, he has always made way more sense and seems much more reasonable and sensible than the father ever was. He has so far managed to keep a safe distance from the “fringe wing” of the libertarians that his father was a card carrying member of.

      His votes have been very disappointing though. When it comes to that issue he seems to fit perfectly with the repubics, thinking that if he plays nice with the dims, they will reciprocate. That never happens!

  • Hey Maggie! Did you see the clip of Ted Cruz “spanking” Eric Holder about the drone strikes against American citizens? You’ve gotta watch it.

  • Richard Hensley

    Maggie did I miss the boat? I thought your post (and it was a good one) was about Ron Paul having the backbone to draw attention to his main point which was:

    “I will speak until I can no longer speak. I will speak as long as it takes, until the alarm is sounded from coast to coast that our Constitution is important, that your rights to trial by jury are precious, that no American should be killed by a drone on American soil without first being charged with a crime, without first being found to be guilty by a court.”

    To paraphrase an old cliche: praise the messenger not for what he is, but the message he delivers. Among all the words Ron Paul spoke the point about Jane Fonda on the AA gun in North Vietnam (which I personally will never forget) would have been drone worthy under Obama’s definitions, was well made. She had the right to express her beliefs – then we should have tried her for treason!

    • Richard Hensley, you didn’t miss my point at all. Did I do something to confuse the message? I stick in that I was still not over Hagel, because that was a vote that he didn’t have to make and had no principled reason to make, but that was an aside from what you have stated above.

      (You’re saying Ron Paul, but I understand that you intended to say Rand Paul. I did the same thing a few posts back and put ‘Ron’ in the title). I was praising him for his message, although if I always followed that rule, I would have praised Obama over and over early on (all the while knowing, from the beginning, he was a lying SOB).

      Sorry if I went astray somewhere.

      • Richard Hensley

        Maggie, first, thank you for correcting me for saying Ron when I meant Rand Paul. During the election I really had trouble keeping Ron Paul, Rand Paul and Paul Ryan straight. Second, you did nothing to confuse the message of your post. While reading the previous comments (some of which were confusing) I thought I had missed Rand Paul’s reason for doing the filibuster, as repeated in my comment. The point is somewhat mute after Hagel’s confirmation. The appointments of Hagel and Brennan further show how much of a muslin-in-drag and Jew hater the sob really is. I could go on, but I will save it for another time

        • Hi Richard, I understand what you are saying. This was a quicker post for me, shorter than usual and I didn’t get into much detail. I was very disappointed in the Hagel matter, even though it is moot now, but NOW I know. No one caring for Israel could have cast a vote for Hagel. He did. No one caring about Israel would have put Hagel up for nomination. Obama did.