Rand Paul

If you're in favor of World War III, you have your candidate. You know, here is the thing. My goodness, what we want in a leader is someone with judgment. Not someone who is so reckless as to stand on the stage and say, yes, I'm jumping up…

I don't think we are. The two Boston bombers were here during the refugee program. Two Iraqi refugees came to my hometown----

Are we sufficiently vetting those who might come here and attack us from the Middle East?

The biggest issue of the day is how we protect ourselves from terrorism. My amendment goes to the heart of the matter.

We do need to be very weary of flights coming in from the Middle East.

Could we have order. The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senate will be in order.

The Russians have come in and, as they have always done, they have used deception and denial.

If everyone else in the world is convinced that we will not pull the trigger, what difference does it make?

We want people to mind their own business and to go about their lives and to do good things and be humanitarian about it.

There has been at least some acknowledgements in some areas that the White House feels that their legal ground may be tenuous.

What are they doing in response to an attack on their friends that they have chosen to help?

The debt ceiling should be used to enforce spending restraints, and he'll do everything he can to stop the current budget deal, including a filibuster.

Benghazi was a 3 a.m. phone call that you never picked up.

You can't want it more than they do.

I think the idea of security cooperation is to lighten the load on our military forces and to decrease the frequency with which we have to deploy them in order to help other countries.

The State Department partnership program is a great program, and it is very cost-effective because it doesn't require that much additional resourcing with potentially modest payouts.

I think some of it has to be at the level of authorities, and then some of it has to be in the bureaucracy.

I think there is periodic reviews of these programs, but usually that is on an annual or semiannual basis.

I think your observation that, making it clear that it is the Afghans' fight is absolutely central in this.

The American public does not support paying their hard-earned taxpayer dollars into a slush fund that spends billions on international climate change programs.

If China does not play a major role and contributes significantly, all that will result environmentally from Paris is hot air from bureaucrats and politicians.

American taxpayer cash is the only green that the international bureaucrats in Paris seem to care about.

I think that already occurs without the bonus.

I personally do not think much of carrying the money over to the next year.

If you are going to cut someone's budget as an incentive, if you actually cut salaries, that might be more of an incentive.