RNC calls it "frivolous" but yet they've assembled an entire team for their defense. This article also contains the best breakdown of current delegate counts I've seen yet.

http://ivn.us/2012/06/26/ron-paul-d...s-lawsuit/

Just saw a news report that Rand is throwing a monkey wrench into the Flood Insurance Bill in the Senate where he's put in an amendment that would identify "personhood" as a fetus.

To me, this isn't the place to fight that batte, but you, Tea, might have a better perspective on it than me.

Know about it? Whazzup with that?

Link: http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-co...27303.html

I got a great chuckle when I read this. I think I can explain:

As someone who means to defend the constitution, Rand has no desire to pass an unconstitutional "Flood Insurance" bill. He also knows that the liberals on both sides of the aisle would use his straight "no" vote against him. So what does he do? He uses Reid's own tactic against him. The leadership of both parties never want a clean, straight up-or-down vote on a bill that only deals with one topic and is short. They can't sneak stuff in that way, it would make it too easy for us common folk to read and understand what was in it.

In other words, this is a way to try to kill this unconstitutional bill without handing them a weapon to use against him. This method was also how he revealed most GOP senators to be anti-gun. Rand has continualy pissed off both Reid and McConnell, and is raising hell in the Senate on every front he can, all the while never exposing himself to their propaganda. His tenure in the Senate is quickly becoming a masterpiece.

 

Now, back to the topic of this thread. The Boston Globe also condemns the illegal actions of the Mass. GOP:

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/op...als_dirty/

They want a war? We'll show them a war!!!

They want a war? We'll show them a war!!!

Okay, love to see it.  Hope whoever "we" is will do just that. 

Go get 'em, Tea.

Hot time in the old town tonight. Rand needs to conduct classes for his fellow Republicans as to what is constitutional and what is not. That would cut out 85% of all legislation. I understand where he is coming from. There needs to be at least one member of the United States House of Representatives who can point the compass at the constitution. Reading the article was very much like listening to a domestic cat fight, he said, she said. It is a lot of fuss about nothing. The Republican establishment likes to throw it's weight around, and Paul likes rules. It will go no where and change nothing. I do grow tired of the egotistical Republican establishment.