Skip to main content

Rand Paul's crazy hair has gone to his head (yes, in more ways than one)...

Kentucky Senator and person voted most likely to be part Chia Pet - Rand Paul - was one of 47 Republican senators to sign the recent and controversial Iran letter, a move which many experts have called unprecedented, adding that it could seriously damage Iran-U.S. negotiations over Iran's nuclear program. However, the giant Chia Pet doesn't see things that way. When speaking with SXSW in Austin, Texas on Sunday, he said the following on the matter:

"There's no one in Washington more against war and more for a negotiated deal than I am. But I want the negotiated deal to be a good deal. So my reason for signing onto the letter, I think it reiterates what is the actual law, that Congress will have to undo sanctions. But I also signed onto the letter because I want the president to negotiate from a position of strength which means that he needs to be telling them in Iran that 'I've got Congress to deal with.'"

Yes, it's Rand Paul's belief that by potentially destroying any negotiations President Obama has made with Iran to this point through the letter he and 46 other senators signed, in the end, it will only help the president with these very negotiations. Given his logic here (or lack there of), expect the Kentucky senator to make the following statements at some point in the future:

- "Yes, it's true, I did give my cousin some illegal drugs, but the only reason for that was to help him with his addiction so that he would stop doing drugs."

- "I may have said I want the death penalty abolished, but that's only because I want more dangerous criminals to be killed via the electric chair."

- "Sure, I've plagiarized here and there, but whenever I do that, it's just to show people I have thoughts and feelings of my own."

Yes, I'm starting to think that crazy hair has gone to his head, in more ways than one.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/15/rand-paul-iran-obama_n_6874582.html

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"