Rand Is Finally Back To Embarrassing Kentucky

What does Texan Troll Rand Paul have to embarrass Kentucky with today?

Why, an appearance where he makes a fool of himself on Libya:

Maybe there would have been armed military on-site had, you know, Republicans like Rand Paul not fought so hard to cut embassy security funding.

5 thoughts on “Rand Is Finally Back To Embarrassing Kentucky

  1. I give you this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_Security_Guard

    In the first sentence, under the heading of Responsibilities, it states: “The primary mission of the MSG (Marine Security Guard) is to provide security, particularly the protection of classified information and equipment vital to the national security of the United States at American diplomatic posts.”

    I first heard this assertion on CBS Morning News as to the primary mission for the Security Guards stations in our Embassies. Not until I heard rand paul’s narcissistic comments in the above video, is the first chance I attempted to validate the roll of the Marine Guards.

    rand belongs in the Westboro Baptist membership.

    My sympathies to families of the four Americans who lost their lives.

  2. You’re right. We need more military funding or we couldn’t be able to defend our embassy. 118 billion plus in military spending is just too little. HEAD-DESK

  3. For once, I agree with FreeManinKy, on the particular point of whether there was funding. The State Dept admitted that funding for embassy security had increased “exponentially.”

    You can try to blame Republicans for our president arming Islamists to overthrow Qaddafi (against the objections of Republicans) and then those same Islamists turning the guns on us, but I don’t think most people are buying it.

    As for Rand, bleh. He’d cut the funding.

  4. The Republicans did cut funding, but there was also $2.2B unspent for security, and if you believe the Congressional testimony of Charlene Lamb:

    Q: “It has been suggested that budget cuts are responsible for a lack of security in Benghazi, and I’d like to ask Miss Lamb,” said Representative Dana Rohrabacher (R., Calif.). “You made this decision personally. Was there any budget consideration and lack of budget which lead you not to increase the number of people in the security force there?”

    A: “No, sir,” said Lamb.

    So frankly, Paul’s statement is irrelevant in this case because funding was not the reason for the downsizing, “normalization” was the reason given by Ms. Lamb

Comments are closed.