John McCain......LOL

That guy is Cranky and didn't ever find a country he didn't want to BOMB!!! lol

I can probably quote a dozen times Rand Paul has stated that he wants to decrease military spending, foreign aid, and corporate welfare. He's quite consistent in his efforts to minimalize government scope, power, and dependency. 

I completely agree but politics are a dirty game and when you can work with someone to find common ground, it's a good thing.  Ron Paul and Senator Bernie Sanders are not bed fellows but both worked together to audit the fed. In which we found out the fed gave the banks I think the last number was 26 Tillion dollars.

 Either way my point is, even if I don't agree and usually can't stand someone, doesn't mean I won't work with them on something we find common ground. Politics was dirtied up by the Tea-Party, actaully it was this awesome guy, . Either way the left has been moving the ball foward for the last 100 years. The 80's we got Reagan and had a shift back to the right on Financial side but we where are seeing the start of a new revolution in politics. Get Elizabeth Warren in the white house and see what she can do. The Republican party is out dated and losing ground everyday. Either they change our hold onto the house until we can break their Jury Mandered states.

people under 40 are overwhelmingly to the left or progressive or whatever you want to call it. These words mean something different to each person. Actually the libertarians have more in common with the progressive's or should I say Democrates than they do the republicans. However the word has been ingrained into their head. i wouldn't see Rand Paul as a libertarian. He's a Tea Party with a small Libertarian. You see what I mean, someone can read what I wrote and completely think different of my definitions.

Also it's funny that people combine Socialism(Bad) with Democratic socialism(good), which Gemany is a good representation of the old and the new. However Hitler at the end was way to the right using religions or a combination of religions to prove his race was the master race. WTF did I just write. LOL

Did you not read anything about this filibuster? It's specifically about whether or not the president has the authority to order a drone strike against an American citizen on American soil (a question on principal and legality), not about the drone program as a whole. The administration has not provided a solid answer on this, Rand was asking for a solid answer. I'm really not sure how you can have an issue with that.

Two things: libertarians are conservatives, their views pre-date progressivism in the United States and adhere to classical liberalism (what the rest of the world calls liberalism.) Democrats and neo-conservative Republicans have more in common than libertarians have with  either; however, Republicans have far more libertarian values, at least by rhethoric, (excluding social conservatives) than Democrats. As for Rand Paul, he is quite obviously philosophically libertarian. If the libertarian party were viable, it'd be almost certain that he'd fit best there. He does try to appeal to the republican party though, and he moderates some of his views for the reason of maintaining electibility. 

Fair enough but I think the new base the Democrates/progressives have way more in common. They don't want to take away the right to choose(Womans rights). The Op post is totally a problem with the base of Dems, The banking system is a major problem. I can go on. I'm telling you progressives and libertarians should get together and take over both parties or the democratic party. The republican fear their base and the democrates hate theirs. LOL

I also do not think Libertarians are conservatives but these words mean nothing. It should be issue by issue. Taken away a right to choose is not being conservative in the meaning of the word. Thats big gov. telling people what to do.

Conservative means to follow a traditional means of doing things. The primary philosophers to the libertarian movement in the U.S were 18th century liberals. Hence, libertarians are conservative. As a libertarian, my biggest concern with progressives is the massive bloating of the government's control over people's lives they promote in anything that doesn't cause social revolution (via marxist techniques of a group vs. society.) Progressives treat woman's rights as a special interest that takes precendence over individual rights, for example. A libertarian says that all people are equal under the law and deserve equal rights. A libertarian would be opposed to something like affirmative action, for example, because it acts as a special interest in order to artifically change the position of a group in society. A libertarian would say somebody has the right to discriminate on their own private property, as they have sovereignty over their own property, where as a progressive believes greatly in government intervention in this case. A libertarian believes in the free-market and some even believe in laissez-faire, a progressive more likely than not is left economically. Overally, the paleo-conservatives are the closest things to libertarians without actually being one. 

Edit: This doesn't mean that libertarians and progressives can't work together. It means that libertarians aren't likely going to try to co-opt the democrat party though. Especially since there isn't much room left in the democrat party anyway. 

Let's do remember that it wasn't just Rand that called out Obama. Ted Cruz, Mark Rubio and Ron Wyden helped him by talking for awhile, so Rand could recuperate. So you had at least 1 Democrat assisting in this.

Like they said, it's not a D or R issue. Its a freedom v. tyranny issue. Whatever precedent Obama sets, the next guy will follow it, just like Obama followed Bush's precedent.

Not all presidents follow predecesors.  Jefferson let a bill expire that Adams put into effect during his term that essentially violated the first amendment.

So if Obama passes this which essentially violates the 5th amendment, the next president could just let it expire, or overturn it if it doesn't have an expiration.  Most all bills these days seem to have a date though that need to be renewed. 

But yea, anyone who hated Bush for the whole arresting and holding without trial thing, Obama just in the last couple weeks resigned that.  He could have let it expire, but he didn't.  So he must like it or believe in it.