Rand Paul is really impressive in how he actually asks the questions that need answering and really doesn't pussyfoot around. First, he attacks this administration for unilaterally attacking Libya without any congressional approval whatsoever (even W. asked for permission from Congress). Then he asks about Morsi's vile, vicious anti-semitic comments (he said Jews were descended from apes and pigs, were inherently violent and then blamed the Jewish-controlled media for the scandal that erupted) and how are we making Israel safer by arming a neighbor who thinks that way about Jews with F-16's?
Kerry admitted that he really doesn't stand for anything and his principles are worthless. On Libya he said you can't be absolutist and that there wasn't enough time ask for Congressional approval as 10,000 civilian lives were in danger. There are two problems with this. First, there was plenty of time to ask for approval. It's not like we went in there, took Gaddafi out and then those civilian lives were saved. We spent 8 months fighting the war in a relatively limited way so if there were 10,000 civilians in imminent danger, they probably died before the fighting was over. Asking for Congressional approvals wouldn't have changed much. Second, does the fact that certain people are in danger mean the President has carte blanche about going to war? By John Kerry's calculations we should have invaded Syria months and months ago as it has already cost the lives of 60,000 people. I don't remember a humanitarian out-clause in the Constitution.
Then Kerry admitted that he doesn't really care that Morsi is a vile anti-semite, he will get his aid anyway. He said "the fact that sometimes other countries elect someone you don’t agree with doesn’t give us permission to walk away." It's not like the disagreement is over trade policy or global warming, the disagreement is over whether Jews are humans and have a right to live in their homeland. Anyway, watch the whole thing, it's 10 minutes long: