Yesterday, Rand Paul led the way in the
to delay Brennan's nomination for CIA director and was quoting passages from
Alice in Wonderland
in an attempt to compare "American ignorance of the issue to the 'Wonderland' world in the book" (H/T to
on this last tidbit; he watched some of it on C-SPAN and made commentary in the Barrel shouter).
Paul, after his obligatory visit to the Wailing Wall in classic neocon submission stance -- whilst wearing a Ralph Lauren Polo jacket for extra lulz -- has been gaining praise and suport of late for taking a 'principled stand' on the Brennan issue. Meanwhile, the majority of Americans still don't know or care about the rather selective manner in which targets are chosen for drone strikes in other countries and also about how the good old USA has a tendency to create terrorists due to some rather inconvenient collateral damage .
These drone strikes would not even be an issue for the vast majority of US citizens if not for the recent awareness raised that it might eventually be their ox getting unconstitutionally gored along with the evil raghead terrorists. Does Paul actually even care about drone strikes? Hard to say, but this was certainly a smrt political move on his part in terms of gaining further approval from the PTB who are conservatively inclined, as well as getting him another step closer to his yet unstated, but obvious goal of securing a presidential bid.
Many people I've talked to about this both on forums and also IRL seem to think what Rand Paul has done is important and heroic because he is defending the Constitution or some such. However, this viewpoint seems rather shortsighted to me. Discuss.