PDA

View Full Version : Rand will be on ABC's This Week with Christiane Amanpour on Sunday Morning




sailingaway
11-04-2010, 05:10 PM
EDIT TO ADD VIDEO: YouTube - Interview With Senator-elect Rand Paul (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=csp4Ea_EILU)

starts at the 3 minute mark once commercial is over, or, a youtube is several pages into this thread.


EDIT:

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment_tv_tvblog/files/2010/11/PX00170_91-300x227.jpg

DETAILS HERE:


***ABC’s “This Week” welcomes two important Republicans: Rep. Mike Pence of Indiana and Senator-elect Rand Paul of Kentucky. Another guest will be David Stockman, who was Ronald Reagan’s budget director. The program starts at 11 a.m. on WFTV-Ch. 9. The panel will be Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind.; John Podesta, president and CEO, Center for American Progress; political strategist Matthew Dowd, who is an ABC News contributor; and George Will and Amy Walter of ABC News..

I'm pretty sure that is eastern time, it is a florida paper.

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment_tv_tvblog/2010/11/sunday-guest-list-rand-paul-on-this-week-rep-eric-cantor-on-fox-news-sunday-sen-mitch-mcconnell-on-face-the-nation.html

torchbearer
11-04-2010, 05:12 PM
i thought she was a foreign correspondant for the middle east?

sailingaway
11-04-2010, 05:13 PM
Form the site she just looks like a politico-schmooze type.

low preference guy
11-04-2010, 05:15 PM
this might be Rand's attempt to present his vision and gain support from non-conservatives

once the election is over, journalists might stop playing gotcha and be able to have a conversation

Libertea Party
11-04-2010, 05:23 PM
I don't know if this is such a good idea. They're trying to smear the incoming Republican Congress as racist etc. I bet she'll spend the whole time talking about the Civil Rights Act. Amanpour is the worst, agenda driven Sunday host out there. I just hope this works out.

Either way Rand should point out what happened the last time he was a topic of discussion on "This Week". Sammy D. got it WRONG, WRONG, WRONG, and is SHOCKED!

YouTube - Senator Rand Paul: "I'll be shocked..." (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m48-ng7kJeM)

S.Shorland
11-04-2010, 05:23 PM
She's British? The British media is infested with HARD Leftys.I don't know if he feels he will get a better hearing from them but I certainly wouldn't be hopeful and they WILL try hard for any gotchas because their whole worldview is under threat by a Libertarian in real power in America.As soon as Ron gets his committee pointed at the FED,we will hear about it here.As soon as ATBC gets talked about there,we will hear about it here.The Pauls are playing a poker game for the whole Western World.That is the actual,incredible fact.

Now that Ron has his own committee,I'm assuming he wll be calling Schiff and the Mises Austrians every day of the week and twice on Sundays?

awake
11-04-2010, 05:25 PM
She is a "professional fermentor of war", I would imagine she is going to test Rand on foreign policy. This will be his "jump in".

lx43
11-04-2010, 05:44 PM
I wouldn't go on her show.

sailingaway
11-04-2010, 06:17 PM
Hm. From this I wouldn't go on her show, yet, either. He does need to go on some to correct his image with the left who have only heard the echo chamber, but not before he defines his own image. I'd go on Hardball first, with a gentleman's agreement that Matthews won't intentionally spin what he says to mean what it doesn't. Outright disagreement is fair, of course.

jmdrake
11-04-2010, 06:25 PM
I don't know if this is such a good idea. They're trying to smear the incoming Republican Congress as racist etc. I bet she'll spend the whole time talking about the Civil Rights Act. Amanpour is the worst, agenda driven Sunday host out there. I just hope this works out.

Either way Rand should point out what happened the last time he was a topic of discussion on "This Week". Sammy D. got it WRONG, WRONG, WRONG, and is SHOCKED!


If Rand is going to be relevant outside of KY he needs to face hostile media at some point. Eventually Fox News will be hostile to the Pauls again to, so folks thinking they can just state off ABC/NBC/CBS/CNN are living in la-la land.

The bottom line is that Rand has had plenty of time to come up with an answer for the CRA question. And if he hasn't then he needs to. It's simple. Stay away from the "right to discriminate" and "black people having to serve klansman" analogies some folks love so much. Stick to the commerce clause point he brought up to Madcow that she ignored. Point out that the commerce clause precedence has been undermined by recent cases and that no matter what anyone thinks of the CRA that it's too bad the two sections of law are built on weak precedence, but that's the problem that happens when people try to do end runs around the constitution even for noble causes.

That or he can just say "I already said I'd have voted for it so it's time to move on. Next question."

S.Shorland
11-04-2010, 06:32 PM
Americans seem to defer to British intellectuals? You seem to think they are more honourable and mistake the accent for civility,I feel? Don't! I knew we had it bad before I discovered the Austrians and Libertarian/Objectivist thinking.Now I'm still stuck here knowing just how bad we have it! I would approach Matthews.I mentioned it on another thread. At least American to American he can read the signs.

DeadheadForPaul
11-04-2010, 06:36 PM
http://i.bnet.com/blogs/its_a_trap.jpg

low preference guy
11-04-2010, 06:38 PM
now that Rand is Sen-elect they'll treat him differently. media people love sucking up to those in power.

ctiger2
11-04-2010, 06:44 PM
Rand will be fine he's a smart MF.

sailingaway
11-04-2010, 07:31 PM
If Rand is going to be relevant outside of KY he needs to face hostile media at some point. Eventually Fox News will be hostile to the Pauls again to, so folks thinking they can just state off ABC/NBC/CBS/CNN are living in la-la land.

The bottom line is that Rand has had plenty of time to come up with an answer for the CRA question. And if he hasn't then he needs to. It's simple. Stay away from the "right to discriminate" and "black people having to serve klansman" analogies some folks love so much. Stick to the commerce clause point he brought up to Madcow that she ignored. Point out that the commerce clause precedence has been undermined by recent cases and that no matter what anyone thinks of the CRA that it's too bad the two sections of law are built on weak precedence, but that's the problem that happens when people try to do end runs around the constitution even for noble causes.

That or he can just say "I already said I'd have voted for it so it's time to move on. Next question."

They aren't going to ask the same thing. The meme now is that if he doesn't filibuster the debt ceiling he betrays his base (the left is trying to plant this thought) but if he does, he destroys the world (despite the fact that 40 other senators would have to agree with him or they'd just vote past the filibuster.)

sailingaway
11-05-2010, 09:55 AM
I have no idea when that is on, what day, time, whatever. But Rand will be on it.

http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/coming-week-exclusive-senator-elect-rand-paul-rep/story?id=12058885

Details here, I think it is eastern time, it was a florida paper:

"***ABC’s “This Week” welcomes two important Republicans: Rep. Mike Pence of Indiana and Senator-elect Rand Paul of Kentucky. Another guest will be David Stockman, who was Ronald Reagan’s budget director. The program starts at 11 a.m. on WFTV-Ch. 9. The panel will be Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind.; John Podesta, president and CEO, Center for American Progress; political strategist Matthew Dowd, who is an ABC News contributor; and George Will and Amy Walter of ABC News."

So it looks like they are trying to put the military on the table for spending cuts, but Coburn said the same thing in an op ed yesterday, so it isn't like Rand will be alone.

jmdrake
11-05-2010, 10:10 AM
They aren't going to ask the same thing. The meme now is that if he doesn't filibuster the debt ceiling he betrays his base (the left is trying to plant this thought) but if he does, he destroys the world (despite the fact that 40 other senators would have to agree with him or they'd just vote past the filibuster.)

Well then he needs to prepare for that. Easy answer. "Last time this was up for a vote, 100% of republicans voted against it. I don't expect any of the new house freshmen to vote for it. So if republican incumbents in the house vote for this they'll have to answer for themselves. As far as what I may or may not filibuster, why don't we not cross that bridge until we get to it?"

libertygrl
11-05-2010, 01:15 PM
Christiane Amanpour?? Since the first time I saw her reporting during the Gulf War I've always thought she was like the coolest female correspondent ever! Totally fearless. Back then many young women wanted to BE Christiane Amanpour!

I believe She was born in Iran and and raised in England. She went to Harvard and JFK Jr. was her roommate. She's also married to Clinton's former press secretary James Rubin. She always seemed fair in her reporting to me.

Check this out from wikipedia:

Amanpour was criticized by pro-Israel advocacy groups HonestReporting and the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA) for her CNN report "God's Warriors." It also referred to her report "God's Jewish Warriors" as "CNN's Abomination."

HonestReporting said in its critique "Hard on Jews, soft on Islam" that Amanpour's reporting contained "bias, inaccuracies and false moral equivalence.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christiane_Amanpour

She's pretty cool (as far as I can remember) and heads waaay above those pinheads Matthews, Olberman, and Maddow with their "in your face" approach. Unless she's changed, Rand should be ok. :)

BenIsForRon
11-05-2010, 01:21 PM
Honestly, I'm in favor of Rand Paul going on as many shows as possible. It keeps the lime light on him going into the new senate session, and the more attention he has, the more power he has.

JK/SEA
11-05-2010, 01:28 PM
Rand will be fine he's a smart MF.

Yeah, and i have a gut feeling HE is going to take the gloves off with these bitches now that he's 'official'....

klamath
11-05-2010, 01:33 PM
Christiane Amanpour?? Since the first time I saw her reporting during the Gulf War I've always thought she was like the coolest female correspondent ever! Totally fearless. Back then many young women wanted to BE Christiane Amanpour!

I believe She was born in Iran and and raised in England. She went to Harvard and JFK Jr. was her roommate. She's also married to Clinton's former press secretary James Rubin. She always seemed fair in her reporting to me.

Check this out from wikipedia:

Amanpour was criticized by pro-Israel advocacy groups HonestReporting and the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA) for her CNN report "God's Warriors." It also referred to her report "God's Jewish Warriors" as "CNN's Abomination."

HonestReporting said in its critique "Hard on Jews, soft on Islam" that Amanpour's reporting contained "bias, inaccuracies and false moral equivalence.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christiane_Amanpour

She's pretty cool (as far as I can remember) and heads waaay above those pinheads Matthews, Olberman, and Maddow with their "in your face" approach. Unless she's changed, Rand should be ok. :)

What I remember her for is bragging that she was the one to get the US involved in Bosnia and Kosovo.

Libertea Party
11-05-2010, 02:14 PM
Here are some examples of her "work". http://www.newsbusters.org/people/television/christiane-amanpour

Libertea Party
11-06-2010, 05:31 PM
This is what's happening right now in the ABC newsroom in preparation for Rand Paul:

YouTube - Miller (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftAylfUoogg)

TheDriver
11-06-2010, 07:06 PM
http://rightvoices.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/tinfoil-hat.jpg

sailingaway
11-06-2010, 09:25 PM
This guy was just seated at a lunch with her and thinks he knows one of the questions she will ask Rand:


My research director has friends in high places as my luncheon seatmate was Christiane Amanpour, the recently coronated host of ABC's Sunday Morning, “This Week”. Ever the world class reporter Ms. Amanpour asked where I was from and wondered what my connection was to ABC. When she heard I was from South Dakota and, she immediately told me of her interest in the Female Faceoff in our U S House race. She said that she had considered doing a feature on the race on several levels but the story it did not materialize.

On learning of my political involvement (particularly on the GOP side), she intently (though courteously and with I thought a tad of indulgence to my unwashed views) pursued a line of questioning of how the Republicans, specifically, were going to deliver on their promises, to cut spending, cut taxes, decrease the deficit, balance the budget, conduct two wars, create jobs, and increase economic growth.

Sidebar – Her hypothesis was similar to one I heard on election night from CBS commentator, Jeff Greenfield who described the GOP wish list as a Hot Fudge Sundae Diet. Since I had been thinking about Greenfield's metaphor, I was somewhat prepared for my distinguished luncheon-mate's question.

We had a lively exchange. I thought I answered her questions adequately; the featured guest on “This Week” tomorrow will be Kentucky Senator elect, Rand Paul. I expect Dr. Paul will get the Hot Fudge Sundae Diet question with both barrels.

http://southdakotastraighttalk.blogspot.com/2010/11/change.html

Libertea Party
11-06-2010, 09:28 PM
^That's fair game. I hope that's what they talk about. That's what Rand's constituents and people across America are concerned about.

DeadheadForPaul
11-06-2010, 09:39 PM
I hope she asks that question...I'll be watching

low preference guy
11-06-2010, 09:57 PM
Who wants to put a wager on whether Rand will be asked about his comments to Wolf that "there are no poor, there are no rich"?

I think he meant that whether you're rich or poor, tax hikes hurt everybody, but the statists will call him insensitive or something.

sailingaway
11-06-2010, 09:59 PM
Who wants to put a wager on whether Rand will be asked about his comments to Wolf that "there are no poor, there are no rich"?

I think he meant that whether you're rich or poor, tax hikes hurt everybody, but the statists will call him insensitive or something.

He made it very clear at the time what he meant, it is only when the words are taken out of the discussion that they can be spun as a news cycle's talking points. I'm not sure she'll give him a chance to address it, but if she does, there is no issue.

JohnEngland
11-07-2010, 04:51 AM
I hope one of the questions ABC asks Rand today is about Graham and his warmongering statements about Iran.

I think Rand would approach the issue from the perspective, "Where is the money to do this? We're 14 trillion dollars in debt and our border is unsecure. Let's bring the troops home and re-deploy them along our borders".

Pure common-sense like that would make Graham look like an idiot and would help the general public realise how stupid war is.

Dripping Rain
11-07-2010, 06:25 AM
What I remember her for is bragging that she was the one to get the US involved in Bosnia and Kosovo.

according to this Billy Kristol and Michael Ledeen are claiming the same honor

Dripping Rain
11-07-2010, 06:27 AM
I dont have abc
found a link but no pic.
i think its abc radio :(
http://www.epctv.com/channels/ABC_News-Online-Watch-2191.htm

dead drunks dont dance
11-07-2010, 06:35 AM
according to this Billy Kristol and Michael Ledeen are claiming the same honor

It was Bill Clinton's freak/lunatic sec of defense madeline halfbright that ordered the nato bombing of that country.

These are the type of scum that Rand Paul will be up against.

Brett85
11-07-2010, 08:33 AM
Has Rand been on yet?

klamath
11-07-2010, 08:41 AM
according to this Billy Kristol and Michael Ledeen are claiming the same honor
I'm sure they do. She was the one that constantly covered the ethic cleaning and was emploring the US do something. She likes wars if it siding with muslims. The people that were getting their asses kicked the worst in Bosnia were the muslims.

thomas-in-ky
11-07-2010, 09:00 AM
http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/rand-paul-long-budget-cuts-short-specifics/story?id=12079618


"Give me one specific cut, Senator-elect," This Week anchor Christiane Amanpour asked Paul in an exclusive interview Sunday morning.

"All across the board," Paul said.

"But you can't just keep saying all across the board," Amanpour pressed.

"No, I can," Paul replied. "I'm going to look at every program, every program." He said he would freeze federal hiring and, perhaps, reduce the number of federal employees by 10% along with the remaining government employees' wages by 10%.

TheDriver
11-07-2010, 09:00 AM
Has Rand been on yet?

Yes....


Good interview, probably disappointed the tin-foilers...

down-under
11-07-2010, 09:08 AM
Yes....


Good interview, probably disappointed the tin-foilers...

Was foreign policy touched on the interview?

MRoCkEd
11-07-2010, 09:08 AM
He should probably have a list of specifics now. He can't be like every other Republican who won't name a single program.

DeadheadForPaul
11-07-2010, 09:11 AM
Yes....


Good interview, probably disappointed the tin-foilers...

Anyone who was disappointed with pre-election Rand on the forums will most likely still be disappointed with post-election Rand.

Hell, this board is flooded with more-antigovernment-than-thou purists, and most - though not all of them - don't even feel that Ron does a sufficient job most of the time. And Ron is probably the best Congressman in the past century.

Now Rand can truly act on his beliefs and unleash part of the libertarian side, but to be honest, he has a much different approach than his father.

Ron will loudly oppose any measure quite loudly without a care as to how his colleagues see him. Think about voting down the medal for Rosa Parks. I mean, yeah it's unconstitutional, but choose your battles. Generating bad press for something as insignificant as that is not worth it. By doing something like that, others will dismiss you, and thus, your voice will be ignored when you debate the debt ("yeah, well he's crazy - he opposed giving a medal to Rosa Parks"). While this is principled, it is not very effective at getting legislation passed or building coalitions (though Ron did a great job with Audit The fed)

Rand seeks to be principled while simultaneously building bridges in order to get things done. He clearly takes a more nuanced approach to politics, and in my opinion, has a better understanding of how to bring independents, mainstream GOP, and even Dems on board a libertarian message.

He cannot, however, fight on 5 different fronts at once. He must stay focused on one or two issues (probably Debt and Read the Bills). If he drifts around from military interventionism to the Fed to the Debt to Civil Liberties, etc., he will alienate pretty much everyone in the Senate just like his father has done in the house.

You must learn to play the game, and it's clear to me that Rand knows how to do that. I don't think he'll do anything embarrassing to us such as voting for war with Iran or increasing taxes, but also don't expect him to lead the charge for every single libertarian position

TheDriver
11-07-2010, 09:14 AM
Was foreign policy touched on the interview?

Yes, a little, he said he needed more info about a few things and suggested maybe Japan, Europe, etc.. could protect themselves.

He also mentioned bringing some troops home and said he cut military spending more than once.

TheDriver
11-07-2010, 09:17 AM
Anyone who was disappointed with pre-election Rand on the forums will most likely still be disappointed with post-election Rand.

Hell, this board is flooded with more-antigovernment-than-thou purists, and most - though not all of them - don't even feel that Ron does a sufficient job most of the time. And Ron is probably the best Congressman in the past century.

Now Rand can truly act on his beliefs and unleash part of the libertarian side, but to be honest, he has a much different approach than his father.

Ron will loudly oppose any measure quite loudly without a care as to how his colleagues see him. Think about voting down the medal for Rosa Parks. I mean, yeah it's unconstitutional, but choose your battles. Generating bad press for something as insignificant as that is not worth it. By doing something like that, others will dismiss you, and thus, your voice will be ignored when you debate the debt ("yeah, well he's crazy - he opposed giving a medal to Rosa Parks"). While this is principled, it is not very effective at getting legislation passed or building coalitions (though Ron did a great job with Audit The fed)

Rand seeks to be principled while simultaneously building bridges in order to get things done. He clearly takes a more nuanced approach to politics, and in my opinion, has a better understanding of how to bring independents, mainstream GOP, and even Dems on board a libertarian message.

He cannot, however, fight on 5 different fronts at once. He must stay focused on one or two issues (probably Debt and Read the Bills). If he drifts around from military interventionism to the Fed to the Debt to Civil Liberties, etc., he will alienate pretty much everyone in the Senate just like his father has done in the house.

You must learn to play the game, and it's clear to me that Rand knows how to do that. I don't think he'll do anything embarrassing to us such as voting for war with Iran or increasing taxes, but also don't expect him to lead the charge for every single libertarian position

QFT^

I see you've been throwing stones down at the black muddy river. ;)

DeadheadForPaul
11-07-2010, 09:18 AM
He should probably have a list of specifics now. He can't be like every other Republican who won't name a single program.

I honestly don't think he has come up with the specifics.

He's probably trying to figure that out right now, and I'm sure he's going to meet with other Senators to discuss the programs which would be best to cut based on both financial considerations and popularity of the program

Agorism
11-07-2010, 09:18 AM
Remember Gary Johnson's approach. Rather than firing people, he had a hiring freeze for his term. That way when people quit\retired etc that government job never got replaced.

DeadheadForPaul
11-07-2010, 09:19 AM
Yes, a little, he said he needed more info about a few things and suggested maybe Japan, Europe, etc.. could protect themselves.

He also mentioned bringing some troops home and said he cut military spending more than once.

Wait...did it air? I thought it's airing in 40 minutes...

TheDriver
11-07-2010, 09:20 AM
Wait...did it air? I thought it's airing in 40 minutes...

It was on here at 8 central time. Rand was on for a good 10 minutes (maybe more).

DeadheadForPaul
11-07-2010, 09:22 AM
Remember Gary Johnson's approach. Rather than firing people, he had a hiring freeze for his term. That way when people quit\retired etc that government job never got replaced.

Really good idea, and it sounds like Rand plans to implement that as well.

I highly doubt we will see any department completely removed. Rand may want to get rid of the DoE, but it's simply become too entrenched in society. The average person does not understand that it's only been around for a short time. They think getting rid of it would mean no public education

I expect to see a lot of downsizing by firing federal employees, freezes on hiring, and adjustment to medicare. I think the GOP is going to stay away from social security for now. If they want to take back over in 2012 in both the Senate and Presidency, there is no way they will do it with the baby-boomers angry at them for fucking up social security

DeadheadForPaul
11-07-2010, 09:23 AM
It was on here at 8 central time. Rand was on for a good 10 minutes (maybe more).

WTF I thought the first post said it was airing at 11 am eastern

edit: weird, airing at 10:30 am central here

sailingaway
11-07-2010, 09:25 AM
He should probably have a list of specifics now. He can't be like every other Republican who won't name a single program.

Sure he can be. They WANT him to name something so they can get people riled up over it in advance. He is going to have those fights when he has looked at the length and breadth of the budget and has a list. There is no reason for him to start those fights before he is ready. The entire REASON Rand's approach is palatable is because it shows no favoritism, and plans to look everywhere.

DeadheadForPaul
11-07-2010, 09:28 AM
Sure he can be. They WANT him to name something so they can get people riled up over it in advance. He is going to have those fights when he has looked at the length and breadth of the budget and has a list. There is no reason for him to start those fights before he is ready. The entire REASON Rand's approach is palatable is because it shows no favoritism, and plans to look everywhere.

This.

Don't unveil your plan ahead of time to the enemy.

The longer they have to come up with arguments against those cuts, then the easier it is for them to argue against said cuts

The MSM echo chamber will bash Rand for any proposed cuts at this point, and it could sink the popularity of his plan. Let them have less time

sailingaway
11-07-2010, 09:31 AM
WTF I thought the first post said it was airing at 11 am eastern

edit: weird, airing at 10:30 am central here

Sorry, I just posted what the paper said. Maybe it is being rebroadcast at different times.

JohnEngland
11-07-2010, 09:33 AM
Remember Gary Johnson's approach. Rather than firing people, he had a hiring freeze for his term. That way when people quit\retired etc that government job never got replaced.

Well played, Gary Johnson. I think he'd make a good president.

Cowlesy
11-07-2010, 09:33 AM
I watched it. He did great!

sailingaway
11-07-2010, 09:36 AM
LOL!

Here's a response to Rand's interview: http://www.uhnd.com/bb/forum/index.php?action=viewall&forumid=2&msgid=176849


Both were on ABC's This Week this morning. Paul talked about spending cuts across the board, including the sacrosanct Pentagon. How refreshing, someone talking about how to actually reduce the deficit. Then Pence comes on with the usual something for nothing pap: Cut taxes but don't really reduce spending in any meaningful ways. Guess which one will be running for President?

The party will have to whip Rand Paul into shape pretty quickly.

klamath
11-07-2010, 09:41 AM
Sure he can be. They WANT him to name something so they can get people riled up over it in advance. He is going to have those fights when he has looked at the length and breadth of the budget and has a list. There is no reason for him to start those fights before he is ready. The entire REASON Rand's approach is palatable is because it shows no favoritism, and plans to look everywhere.

Yes, the left media want as much forwarning for what programs are under the axe so they can whip up the lobby groups to defeat it. If the republicans actually cut anything there is going to be a sh*tstorm. France anybody? Most likely cuts will go nowhere as they will get locked up in the senate and if not there Obama will surely veto any unpopular cuts to government programs. Remembe the democrats still control 2/3 of the government.

specsaregood
11-07-2010, 09:41 AM
This interview is going great.

DeadheadForPaul
11-07-2010, 09:43 AM
How far into the program was Rand's interview?

Btw, thanks for the heads up about this. I always get a little more joy out of waiting for a program to air and then watching it than catching it on youtube later!

TheDriver
11-07-2010, 09:43 AM
How far into the program was Rand's interview?



Right after intro, he's first.

Patrick Henry
11-07-2010, 09:44 AM
How far into the program was Rand's interview?

Btw, thanks for the heads up about this. I always get a little more joy out of waiting for a program to air and then watching it than catching it on youtube later!

He was the first one on.

JohnGalt23g
11-07-2010, 09:47 AM
Can someone please upload a video?

At your leisure, of course.

specsaregood
11-07-2010, 09:51 AM
LOL!

Here's a response to Rand's interview: http://www.uhnd.com/bb/forum/index.php?action=viewall&forumid=2&msgid=176849

Pence comes across as a fake douchebag. These guys are gonna have to start demanding to go on before Rand.

MRoCkEd
11-07-2010, 09:52 AM
Interview is up:
http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/

sailingaway
11-07-2010, 09:55 AM
ABC is doing just what we thought and the left media the same, the spin is already "Rand Paul, long on budget cuts, short of specifics"

The guy isn't even in office yet. They just want targets to mobilize opposition with -- knowing there is a lobby that will oppose every cut. Rand is playing it right by just saying everything is on the table.

TheDriver
11-07-2010, 09:57 AM
Pence comes across as a fake douchebag.

While Pence has made a few good votes, he was largely a rubber stamp for George W. Bush. He had no problem supporting bailouts (some not all), stimulus and unbalanced budgets when Republicans were in power.

While he's more conservative than a Linsey Graham, he's not conservative enough.

Patrick Henry
11-07-2010, 09:57 AM
Pence comes across as a fake douchebag. These guys are gonna have to start demanding to go on before Rand.

The news folks have him on first in the hopes that he will say something that they deem controversial so that they can then use that in the following segments.

The funny thing is that him being on first shows just how fake and out of touch the establishment really is.

TheDriver
11-07-2010, 09:59 AM
ABC is doing just what we thought and the left media the same, the spin is already "Rand Paul, long on budget cuts, short of specifics"

The guy isn't even in office yet. They just want targets to mobilize opposition with -- knowing there is a lobby that will oppose every cut. Rand is playing it right by just saying everything is on the table.

Actually he did something else too - he served some prime "bait" on a silver platter. "Rand Paul wants to cut military spending."

The problem for the hacks at ABC, that doesn't fit their narrative.... :D

MRoCkEd
11-07-2010, 10:04 AM
That was a good interview.

Aratus
11-07-2010, 10:05 AM
seeing how well the interview went, why didn't david gregory move heaven and earth
to be the first major talking head to interview him, rather than looking like he's pulling
what keith olbermann did in terms of some campaign contributions & his guest list etc...

Magsec
11-07-2010, 10:10 AM
Haha 'Mediscare" ads

MsDoodahs
11-07-2010, 10:12 AM
watching it now - Rand is doing great so far!

thomas-in-ky
11-07-2010, 10:13 AM
That was a good great interview.

fify^^^

I wish we had a senator like that from KY. Oh wait, that is our senator!!!! :p

Time for you other states to man up and send a Senator like Rand to D.C.!

Sorry to gloat.

sailingaway
11-07-2010, 10:13 AM
Interview is up:
http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/

Thank you!

DeadheadForPaul
11-07-2010, 10:13 AM
Interview is up:
http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/

Thanks!

Dumb question: What is the STAR/START Treaty? Is that about nuclear proliferation?

Dreamofunity
11-07-2010, 10:14 AM
Great interview. Rand is less in campaigning mode and more in philosophical mode.

DeadheadForPaul
11-07-2010, 10:14 AM
fify^^^

I wish we had a senator like that from KY. Oh wait, that is our senator!!!! :p

Time for you other states to man up and send a Senator like Rand to D.C.!

Sorry to gloat.

LOL

I just read that and then put the gloat music on in my head

YouTube - Glenn Beck Gloat Fest 2010! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CdES0GP0KhI)

sailingaway
11-07-2010, 10:14 AM
fify^^^

I wish we had a senator like that from KY. Oh wait, that is our senator!!!! :p

Time for you other states to man up and send a Senator like Rand to D.C.!

Sorry to gloat.

You have a black heart, Thomas! :p

I live in California. I voted the best I could, but my work in Kentucky had way more result....

MsDoodahs
11-07-2010, 10:17 AM
Holy Cow Rand did fantastic!

I cannot BELIEVE what a fab job he did!

sailingaway
11-07-2010, 10:24 AM
Thanks!

Dumb question: What is the STAR/START Treaty? Is that about nuclear proliferation?

Yeah, but it is a ton of other stuff as well, and a particular approach. They want to make it sound like it is just that, so being against it would be like being against apple pie.

TheDriver
11-07-2010, 10:25 AM
My favorite part was when CA ask if he'd be open to some tax increases and he said NO! :p

thomas-in-ky
11-07-2010, 10:30 AM
LOL

I just read that and then put the gloat music on in my head

YouTube - Glenn Beck Gloat Fest 2010! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CdES0GP0KhI)

Thanks for a great laugh. That's exactly how I feel this morning... but now that music is stuck in my head too!

JohnEngland
11-07-2010, 10:33 AM
Rand was awesome!! He's so quick, informed and on the ball.

This is the difference between campaigning and actually working. I'm sure Rand would have liked to talk like this during the campaign but such are elections that proper debate is impossible until you're in power.

Looking forward to Senator Rand Paul!! I hope he writes a book - just so that I can give him some money :D

Austrian Econ Disciple
11-07-2010, 10:37 AM
He dodged Foreign Policy questions -- not good. Other than that, it's going to take a lot more than 5% to 10% cut across the board to get a balanced budget. 10% of 4 Trillion is 400 Billion. Rand don't you know the deficit is 1.4 trillion, not 400 billion?

Rand is too timid.

*Dons flamesuit.

forsmant
11-07-2010, 10:39 AM
Wow, this was a very good interview. Its amazing how we are shaping the debate. Times they are a changing.

sailingaway
11-07-2010, 10:41 AM
He dodged Foreign Policy questions -- not good. Other than that, it's going to take a lot more than 5% to 10% cut across the board to get a balanced budget. 10% of 4 Trillion is 400 Billion. Rand don't you know the deficit is 1.4 trillion, not 400 billion?

Rand is too timid.

*Dons flamesuit.

Remember what Ron said in his introduction about if it goes in the right direction and is significant it is a compromise we can live with? Whereas compromising on how much the INCREASE is, is not? You make the first cuts that people can agree on. There will be little tinkering with the first budget because it will already have been designed before the new senators and House get there. Something like a 10% cut MIGHT pass across the board. He doesn't want to be seen as someone who can't be worked with. Did you hear what he says? He wants to be on the budget committee. I don't see why anyone would flame you for thinking Rand isn't perfect. No one is perfect. Who in the Senate would you rather have on the budget committee?

Because on the other hand, I don't see why anyone would listen to you if all you do is carp that he isn't perfect, either.

BlackTerrel
11-07-2010, 10:41 AM
If Rand is going to be relevant outside of KY he needs to face hostile media at some point. Eventually Fox News will be hostile to the Pauls again to, so folks thinking they can just state off ABC/NBC/CBS/CNN are living in la-la land.

The bottom line is that Rand has had plenty of time to come up with an answer for the CRA question. And if he hasn't then he needs to. It's simple. Stay away from the "right to discriminate" and "black people having to serve klansman" analogies some folks love so much. Stick to the commerce clause point he brought up to Madcow that she ignored. Point out that the commerce clause precedence has been undermined by recent cases and that no matter what anyone thinks of the CRA that it's too bad the two sections of law are built on weak precedence, but that's the problem that happens when people try to do end runs around the constitution even for noble causes.

Yep.

Immortal Technique
11-07-2010, 10:45 AM
Heres the youtube gang

Rand Paul ABC "This Week" Interview
YouTube - Rand Paul ABC "This Week" Interview (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dN0N6roRGZ8)

Airing Date Nov.07, 2010

DeadheadForPaul
11-07-2010, 10:46 AM
He dodged Foreign Policy questions -- not good. Other than that, it's going to take a lot more than 5% to 10% cut across the board to get a balanced budget. 10% of 4 Trillion is 400 Billion. Rand don't you know the deficit is 1.4 trillion, not 400 billion?

Rand is too timid.

*Dons flamesuit.

LOL

Rand isn't perfect, but a number of RPFers unrealistically expect him to walk in and dismantle half the government and end all wars.

It's funny because I interpreted the dodging in a radically different way.

He dodged them because he is anti-interventionist but doesn't want the GOP rank-and-file to realize it yet.
If you followed the primary at all, it was clear that Rand purposefully didn't bring up the Iraq War, Afghanistan, etc.
Hell, he got belittled and attacked for saying that Iran with 1 nuke is "not a threat to America". I'm actually amazed that attack didn't bring him down. Yet you want to act like he's a secret war hawk or something.
One battle at a time

AustrianEconDisciple, don't you know that you never get into specifics with the liberal echo chamber and reveal your hand on the debt? She was desperately trying to get him to say something unpopular right now so they can spread it in the MSM in the time leading up to him taking office

It's almost like you can't wait to pounce on one comment of Rand's and call him a statist

PatriotOne
11-07-2010, 10:48 AM
Holy Cow Rand did fantastic!

I cannot BELIEVE what a fab job he did!

Holy Cow was what I thought too. That was by far the best I have seen Rand do in an interview. Looks like he's learned his lessons well from past interviews and finally got some sleep. He was sharp!

I couldn't be prouder. That was awesomesauce :D.

Austrian Econ Disciple
11-07-2010, 10:49 AM
Remember what Ron said in his introduction about if it goes in the right direction and is significant it is a compromise we can live with? Whereas compromising on how much the INCREASE is, is not? You make the first cuts that people can agree on. There will be little tinkering with the first budget because it will already have been designed before the new senators and House get there. Something like a 10% cut MIGHT pass across the board. He doesn't want to be seen as someone who can't be worked with. Did you hear what he says? He wants to be on the budget committee. I don't see why anyone would flame you for thinking Rand isn't perfect. No one is perfect. Who in the Senate would you rather have on the budget committee?

Because on the other hand, I don't see why anyone would listen to you if all you do is carp that he isn't perfect, either.

There are enough votes in the Senate right now (with the new makeup) to cut at least 300 billion in military spending. Sure the Republicans will not like it, but being a libertarian we piss off every side. I don't think you want a run of the mill Republican do you? That is what Rand is positioning himself as. I would rather start the debate at cutting 1.4 trillion and then comp a little to cut 1 trillion. Why would you low-ball yourself?

Why start with 10%? How about 30%? Then cut down to 25%. 10% is chump change. We don't have time for another 7 years of deficits. If you want to finally balance the budget in the year 2022 when it doesn't matter anymore, then thats your peroragative, but its ultimately useless strategy.

TheDriver
11-07-2010, 10:50 AM
There are enough votes in the Senate right now (with the new makeup) to cut at least 300 billion in military spending. Sure the Republicans will not like it, but being a libertarian we piss off every side. I don't think you want a run of the mill Republican do you? That is what Rand is positioning himself as. I would rather start the debate at cutting 1.4 trillion and then comp a little to cut 1 trillion. Why would you low-ball yourself?

Why start with 10%? How about 30%? Then cut down to 25%. 10% is chump change. We don't have time for another 7 years of deficits. If you want to finally balance the budget in the year 2022 when it doesn't matter anymore, then thats your peroragative, but its ultimately useless strategy.

Run for office..... :rolleyes:

Austrian Econ Disciple
11-07-2010, 10:52 AM
LOL

It's funny because I interpreted the dodging in a radically different way.

He dodged them because he is anti-interventionist but doesn't want the GOP rank-and-file to realize it yet. One battle at a time

AustrianEconDisciple, don't you know that you never get into specifics with the liberal echo chamber and reveal your hand on the debt? She was desperately trying to get him to say something unpopular right now so they can spread it in the MSM in the time leading up to him taking office

It's almost like you can't wait to pounce on one comment of Rand's and call him a statist

I don't like timirity. He had plenty of time to defend his positions. These times do not call for timirity. If you think we have 20 years to play the little game, then I don't know what to say other than we do not have 20 years.

MRoCkEd
11-07-2010, 10:52 AM
There are enough votes in the Senate right now (with the new makeup) to cut at least 300 billion in military spending. Sure the Republicans will not like it, but being a libertarian we piss off every side. I don't think you want a run of the mill Republican do you? That is what Rand is positioning himself as. I would rather start the debate at cutting 1.4 trillion and then comp a little to cut 1 trillion. Why would you low-ball yourself?

Why start with 10%? How about 30%? Then cut down to 25%. 10% is chump change. We don't have time for another 7 years of deficits. If you want to finally balance the budget in the year 2022 when it doesn't matter anymore, then thats your peroragative, but its ultimately useless strategy.
Are you sure you listened to the interview?
Rand did say he will propose his own balanced budget, meaning 1.4 trillion in cuts. If that fails, he will propose a two-year balanced budget. If that fails, three. So he'll be putting all the cuts out there and forcing the others to take a stand.

sailingaway
11-07-2010, 10:53 AM
There are enough votes in the Senate right now (with the new makeup) to cut at least 300 billion in military spending. Sure the Republicans will not like it, but being a libertarian we piss off every side. I don't think you want a run of the mill Republican do you? That is what Rand is positioning himself as. I would rather start the debate at cutting 1.4 trillion and then comp a little to cut 1 trillion. Why would you low-ball yourself?

Why start with 10%? How about 30%? Then cut down to 25%. 10% is chump change. We don't have time for another 7 years of deficits. If you want to finally balance the budget in the year 2022 when it doesn't matter anymore, then thats your peroragative, but its ultimately useless strategy.

Then they won't put him on the budget committee. Think of Ron not being on the Finance Committee. What a waste. The other side has been working incrementalism very well for themselves. It may not be what we want or will get when Rand is established, but he isn't even in office yet, and his power depends on his appointments. The first budget, the one voted on in January, is NOT going to have those kinds of cuts, and Rand will have very little input into it. If he can signal something like a 10% cut and get support behind that before he is even sworn in, that would be pretty major, for someone who doesn't yet even have a vote.

Austrian Econ Disciple
11-07-2010, 10:53 AM
Run for office..... :rolleyes:

I don't want to run others lives. In any event, how is that a critique at all?

So, if I don't run for office, I can't critique the man at all? Sounds the same as Neo-Cons telling you to go move to bumsquat if you don't like being tortured.

torchbearer
11-07-2010, 10:55 AM
I don't want to run others lives. In any event, how is that a critique at all?

So, if I don't run for office, I can't critique the man at all? Sounds the same as Neo-Cons telling you to go move to bumsquat if you don't like being tortured.

we need people to run for office for the very reason to keep others from running our lives. that is how is see ron and rand.

and it is very easy to be critical of others, but are you willing to go the extra mile like they have to make your ideas a reality?

that is what i got from his post.

sailingaway
11-07-2010, 10:55 AM
I don't want to run others lives. In any event, how is that a critique at all?

So, if I don't run for office, I can't critique the man at all? Sounds the same as Neo-Cons telling you to go move to bumsquat if you don't like being tortured.

No, but you become a dull buzz in the background if nothing is ever good enough, even when it is far better than anyone else is doing, and remembering he has to drive enough consensus to get things passed. It is going to be a CONSTANT difference, because he is there primarily to pass bills, whereas Ron has historically been in office to educate. Ron is my favorite, but people are already discounting his run for president because of his age (I want him at any age.) I am speaking partly, I know, out of utter relief that there will still be a voice for us when Ron retires, even if it isn't quite Ron's. I do think you should at least give Rand a chance, and you don't seem inclined to do so.

Austrian Econ Disciple
11-07-2010, 10:58 AM
we need people to run for office for the very reason to keep others from running our lives. that is how is see ron and rand.

and it is very easy to be critical of others, but are you willing to go the extra mile like they have to make your ideas a reality?

that is what i got from his post.

I have been doing that and more. One doesn't need to be a politicker to effect a change in thought process. That's ok, I won't ever critique the man again -- he is perfect.

Austrian Econ Disciple
11-07-2010, 10:59 AM
No, but you become a dull buzz in the background if nothing is ever good enough, even when it is far better than anyone else is doing, and remembering he has to drive enough consensus to get things passed. It is going to be a CONSTANT difference, because he is there primarily to pass bills, whereas Ron has historically been in office to educate.

If he says he wants a balanced budget, then proposes 10% cuts which doesn't balance the budget then damn well yes, I will critique him. Perhaps he should clarify what he means -- I want a balanced budget in the year 2025.

If you guys are so afraid to come out for cuts in entitlements or defense, you will never have a balanced budget. Sorry, I don't take someone seriously when they want to tinker with the outside edges and not get to the meat of the issue. Well, that is DC for you I guess. Seems like DC is changing Rand, not the other way around.

As for giving Rand a chance -- I am. I can only go by the mans words and actions. So far not good.

Anyways, I'm done here. Pavlovian defense mechanisms have been engaged.

torchbearer
11-07-2010, 11:00 AM
I have been doing that and more. One doesn't need to be a politicker to effect a change in thought process. That's ok, I won't ever critique the man again -- he is perfect.

well, education is key. you will never get an ancap society until the majority of people understand it and support it... but that change will need to come through our government. as in, ancaps win the congress and then with the vote of the states, abolishes it. you will need the support of the people in all cases.

sailingaway
11-07-2010, 11:01 AM
If he says he wants a balanced budget, then proposes 10% cuts which doesn't balance the budget then damn well yes, I will critique him. Perhaps he should clarify what he means -- I want a balanced budget in the year 2025.

Next year he is going to propose a balanced budget. You, like all of us, have to wait to see it until he has the staff and numbers. He has a general idea, but is actually going to propose a balanced budget. These are mere concepts he is discussing.

DeadheadForPaul
11-07-2010, 11:01 AM
I have been doing that and more. One doesn't need to be a politicker to effect a change in thought process. That's ok, I won't ever critique the man again -- he is perfect.

So what do you do then to bring change

jabf2006
11-07-2010, 11:09 AM
That was a fantastic interview. I don't care if he doesn't provide rhetoric and is a little timid on foreign policy. Every word seemed to be strategic, and he managed to present himself as honest and realistic without sacrificing much information to those who are waiting to pounce on him.

I'm not going to start criticizing him until he has a voting record to criticize; until then, if his interviews continue as that interview did, I'm happy.

klamath
11-07-2010, 11:15 AM
There are enough votes in the Senate right now (with the new makeup) to cut at least 300 billion in military spending. Sure the Republicans will not like it, but being a libertarian we piss off every side. I don't think you want a run of the mill Republican do you? That is what Rand is positioning himself as. I would rather start the debate at cutting 1.4 trillion and then comp a little to cut 1 trillion. Why would you low-ball yourself?

Why start with 10%? How about 30%? Then cut down to 25%. 10% is chump change. We don't have time for another 7 years of deficits. If you want to finally balance the budget in the year 2022 when it doesn't matter anymore, then thats your peroragative, but its ultimately useless strategy.

Boy you are really getting out there now.

AuH20
11-07-2010, 11:19 AM
The force is strong with this one. ;)

specsaregood
11-07-2010, 11:27 AM
"But you can't just keep saying all across the board," Amanpour pressed.

"No, I can," Paul replied. "I'm going to look at every program, every program."

That was my favorite part. Except it needs to include the fact that you can literally see his face *light up* at the claim that he can't say that.

AuH20
11-07-2010, 11:30 AM
That was my favorite part. Except it needs to include the fact that you can literally see his face *light up* at the claim that he can't say that.

Greece instituted austerity measures and had to do the same. Rand needs to start bringing the mind boggling statistics to the table that illustrate that an axe is needed instead of a scalpel. You have to devastate the deceitful media. For example, the interest on the national deficit in 2020 will consume the entire GDP for the country. Secondly, federal tax revenue dropped by close to 20% over the last year.

AuH20
11-07-2010, 11:44 AM
there are some fans at Free Republic:


To: Morgan in Denver

Poor christine Ahmanpoor.....she can’t debate or interview and can’t keep up with Rand Paul....Even so, she keeps interrupitng him and throwing phoney , outrageous questiosn..

Why is paul just responding as fast as she throws out the questios...Guess that’s cause he is a doctor.ha. they rapid fire right back..

He did great.

these morons have no clue how to handle conservatives..ha.

214 posted on Sunday, November 07, 2010 10:29:45 AM by Recovering Ex-hippie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

specsaregood
11-07-2010, 11:54 AM
there are some fans at Free Republic:

You got a link? I couldn't find this interview discussed at all.
edit2: ok found it.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2623011/posts

Libertea Party
11-07-2010, 12:04 PM
Okay so I was wrong. I admit it. The forum was really fair and the questions relevant.

Rand looked confident, serious, and principled.

low preference guy
11-07-2010, 12:06 PM
When the lady mentioned


Most economists say the budget can't be balanced without increasing taxes

I wished Rand responded with

"Most economists said there wasn't a housing bubble"

Matt Collins
11-07-2010, 12:12 PM
Wow that woman was obnoxious....

low preference guy
11-07-2010, 12:14 PM
..

Matt Collins
11-07-2010, 12:28 PM
"I have closely analyzed and scrutinized Rand Paul's positions, and they are identical to his father's... the only difference is the wording" -- a very well known intellectual who shall for now remain nameless.

JackieDan
11-07-2010, 12:28 PM
This was a great Interview!

Rand Paul did great.

Melissa
11-07-2010, 12:57 PM
I agree I have been waiting and still will wait to see his votes but thought he answered perfect. The way I hope all of us would, if we were in his spot right now. I am sure he has lots of reading to do to get ready for votes, so lets wait and watch his votes

ItsTime
11-07-2010, 01:00 PM
Heres the youtube gang

Rand Paul ABC "This Week" Interview
YouTube - Rand Paul ABC "This Week" Interview (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dN0N6roRGZ8)

Airing Date Nov.07, 2010

He sounds presidential. :D

Imaginos
11-07-2010, 01:24 PM
Heres the youtube gang

Rand Paul ABC "This Week" Interview
YouTube - Rand Paul ABC "This Week" Interview (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dN0N6roRGZ8)

Airing Date Nov.07, 2010
Wow, that's the best Rand Paul interview ever.
Is it just me or Rand made some big improvement on his skill of the verbal articulation?

jabf2006
11-07-2010, 01:44 PM
Wow, that's the best Rand Paul interview ever.
Is it just me or Rand made some big improvement on his skill of the verbal articulation?

He's well rested.

Modern_Matthew
11-07-2010, 01:45 PM
fify^^^

I wish we had a senator like that from KY. Oh wait, that is our senator!!!! :p

Time for you other states to man up and send a Senator like Rand to D.C.!

Sorry to gloat.

Electing a Paul to the Senate is probably the best thing Kentucky has ever done.

Never been proud of my state for anything else. :D

MRoCkEd
11-07-2010, 02:02 PM
Did you notice Rand said he was going to have his own budget ready by January?

This is the book he referenced that will help him do it:
http://www.catostore.org/index.asp?fa=ProductDetails&pid=1441277&method=search&t=&a=edwards&k=&aeid=120&adv=&pg

You can read a lot of the book online:
http://www.amazon.com/Downsizing-Federal-Government-Chris-Edwards/dp/1930865821/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1289160193&sr=8-1#reader_1930865821

TheDriver
11-07-2010, 02:04 PM
Did you notice Rand said he was going to have his own budget ready by January?

This is the book he referenced that will help him do it:
http://www.catostore.org/index.asp?fa=ProductDetails&pid=1441277&method=search&t=&a=edwards&k=&aeid=120&adv=&pg

Cliff notes: http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa515.pdf

clint4liberty
11-07-2010, 02:06 PM
EDIT:

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment_tv_tvblog/files/2010/11/PX00170_91-300x227.jpg

DETAILS HERE:

.

I'm pretty sure that is eastern time, it is a florida paper.

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment_tv_tvblog/2010/11/sunday-guest-list-rand-paul-on-this-week-rep-eric-cantor-on-fox-news-sunday-sen-mitch-mcconnell-on-face-the-nation.html

We have added this news article as well as the entire Rand Paul Forums on Ron Paul Forums to Kentuckiana GrassRoots Radio. http://www.blogtalkradio.com/ky-grassroots-radio

Brett85
11-07-2010, 02:21 PM
While Pence has made a few good votes, he was largely a rubber stamp for George W. Bush. He had no problem supporting bailouts (some not all), stimulus and unbalanced budgets when Republicans were in power.

While he's more conservative than a Linsey Graham, he's not conservative enough.

That's false. Pence voted against No Child Left Behind, the Medicare Prescription Drug Bill, TARP and all of the other bailouts. He was one of the few Republicans in the House who actually stood up to George W. Bush.

Imperial
11-07-2010, 02:29 PM
I don't know why she was acting like he wasn't giving her details. I hardly ever see an elected official giving that many specifics in an interview. Great interview!

Brett85
11-07-2010, 02:31 PM
He dodged Foreign Policy questions -- not good. Other than that, it's going to take a lot more than 5% to 10% cut across the board to get a balanced budget. 10% of 4 Trillion is 400 Billion. Rand don't you know the deficit is 1.4 trillion, not 400 billion?

Rand is too timid.

*Dons flamesuit.

I think I actually agree with you for the first time ever. Rand needs to be more specific on foreign policy issues, particularly the War in Afghanistan. You're either in favor of continuing the nation building project in Afghanistan, or you're opposed to it. There's nothing in between. If Rand wants to bring our troops home, then he should come out and say so. He could even say that he's in favor of a phased out withdrawel in Afghanistan, and at least he would be admitting where he stands on the issue. Other than that I thought he came across very well in the interview.

Brian4Liberty
11-07-2010, 02:32 PM
I don't know why she was acting like he wasn't giving her details. I hardly ever see an elected official giving that many specifics in an interview. Great interview!

Because she was simply being an attack dog? I noticed that too. Rand gave more details than anyone, but her script was to keep repeating that he couldn't give details, even after he had just given them. The left media are doing this across the board to candidates they don't like.

Let's see how nice they are to Marco Rubio when he gets back from his election celebration.

JohnGalt23g
11-07-2010, 02:37 PM
Excellent performance Dr. Paul!! Top notch!

Kotin
11-07-2010, 02:37 PM
Rand did very well..

low preference guy
11-07-2010, 02:42 PM
So Rand is agreeing as a compromise to cut military spending, i.e., his proposed "compromise" is something he wanted all along. That's clever and hilarious.

BamaFanNKy
11-07-2010, 02:44 PM
I think I actually agree with you for the first time ever. Rand needs to be more specific on foreign policy issues, particularly the War in Afghanistan. You're either in favor of continuing the nation building project in Afghanistan, or you're opposed to it. There's nothing in between. If Rand wants to bring our troops home, then he should come out and say so. He could even say that he's in favor of a phased out withdrawel in Afghanistan, and at least he would be admitting where he stands on the issue. Other than that I thought he came across very well in the interview.

The interview was already 11 minutes and had a ton of info.... You can't discuss everything.

Dripping Rain
11-07-2010, 02:51 PM
That's false. Pence voted against No Child Left Behind, the Medicare Prescription Drug Bill, TARP and all of the other bailouts. He was one of the few Republicans in the House who actually stood up to George W. Bush.

thanks for the info TC. My opinion on Pence is starting to actually change. seems like hes not that bad at least fiscally since i dont know about his fp

Brett85
11-07-2010, 02:53 PM
The interview was already 11 minutes and had a ton of info.... You can't discuss everything.

Yes, but she asked him specifically about Afghanistan. He's going to have to decide whether he's going to vote to fund the war in Afghanistan or not. It seems to me like he still doesn't know what he's going to do.

libertygrl
11-07-2010, 02:56 PM
Wow that woman was obnoxious....

Really? I didn't see that. Unlike the other talking heads on cable news today, she was tough and aggressive yet at least she was civil and allowed Rand to finish his sentences. I actually thought it was refreshing for a change! Excellent interview and good job by both.

teacherone
11-07-2010, 02:57 PM
Yes, but she asked him specifically about Afghanistan. He's going to have to decide whether he's going to vote to fund the war in Afghanistan or not. It seems to me like he still doesn't know what he's going to do.

he answered that there is a lot of information he has never had access to and would need to digest before making an informed decision.

that's a thinking politician my friend.

Feeding the Abscess
11-07-2010, 02:57 PM
thanks for the info TC. My opinion on Pence is starting to actually change. seems like hes not that bad at least fiscally since i dont know about his fp

Pence is terrible. He's for the PATRIOT Act and pre-emptive war. That's all you need to know.

I, too, would have liked a stronger statement Afghanistan. He did mention bringing home troops from around the world, so perhaps he's playing hide and seek for now.

teacherone
11-07-2010, 02:58 PM
nvm

AParadigmShift
11-07-2010, 03:04 PM
Wow, that's the best Rand Paul interview ever.
Is it just me or Rand made some big improvement on his skill of the verbal articulation?

That all may be very well and true, but I missed the devil-may-care hair style....

Nary a curl was out of place :D


Yes, but she asked him specifically about Afghanistan. He's going to have to decide whether he's going to vote to fund the war in Afghanistan or not. It seems to me like he still doesn't know what he's going to do.

And it's times like these, where Rand, if he's inclined to diminish Empire America, could have thoughtfully articulated sound "conservative" reasoning for an Af~Pak withdrawal.

TheDriver
11-07-2010, 03:06 PM
That's false. Pence voted against No Child Left Behind, the Medicare Prescription Drug Bill, TARP and all of the other bailouts. He was one of the few Republicans in the House who actually stood up to George W. Bush.

Sit down! hahaha....

Mike Pence
* VOTED FOR 94% OF THE MASSIVE BUSH BUDGETS

In addition to:
* Voted FOR the Bush stimulus in 2008 costing taxpayers $152 billion.
* Voted FOR a $150 billion bailout for the housing industry in 2008.
* Voted FOR $192 billion in additional federal stimulus spending, in July of 2009
* Voted YES allowing federal government electronic surveillance without a warrant in 2006.
* Voted AGAINST requiring FISA warrants for wiretaps in March 2008.
* Voted FOR the REAL ID Act in February 2005
* Voted FOR the USA PATRIOT Act in 2001 and voted to make it permanent in 2005.
* Voted FOR the Military Commissions Act in 2005 and 2006.
* Voted FOR the Electronic Surveillance Modernization Act.
* Voted AGAINST banning torture of detainees held by U.S. forces.

Melissa
11-07-2010, 03:13 PM
Did you notice Rand said he was going to have his own budget ready by January?

This is the book he referenced that will help him do it:
http://www.catostore.org/index.asp?fa=ProductDetails&pid=1441277&method=search&t=&a=edwards&k=&aeid=120&adv=&pg

You can read a lot of the book online:
http://www.amazon.com/Downsizing-Federal-Government-Chris-Edwards/dp/1930865821/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1289160193&sr=8-1#reader_1930865821

Just bought it to read...thanks

Brett85
11-07-2010, 03:15 PM
Sit down! hahaha....

Mike Pence
* VOTED FOR 94% OF THE MASSIVE BUSH BUDGETS

In addition to:
* Voted FOR the Bush stimulus in 2008 costing taxpayers $152 billion.
* Voted FOR a $150 billion bailout for the housing industry in 2008.
* Voted FOR $192 billion in additional federal stimulus spending, in July of 2009
* Voted YES allowing federal government electronic surveillance without a warrant in 2006.
* Voted AGAINST requiring FISA warrants for wiretaps in March 2008.
* Voted FOR the REAL ID Act in February 2005
* Voted FOR the USA PATRIOT Act in 2001 and voted to make it permanent in 2005.
* Voted FOR the Military Commissions Act in 2005 and 2006.
* Voted FOR the Electronic Surveillance Modernization Act.
* Voted AGAINST banning torture of detainees held by U.S. forces.

Pence isn't perfect, but he's still a lot better than most of the house Republicans. And I imagine Rand would've voted for the military commissions act as well. He has said that he supports military tribunals for terrorists. The only other alternative would be to import terrorists into the U.S. and try them in civilian courts, which would end up costing taxpayers a lot of money.

Melissa
11-07-2010, 03:15 PM
thanks for the info TC. My opinion on Pence is starting to actually change. seems like hes not that bad at least fiscally since i dont know about his fp

In the scheme of what we have going on Pence is not bad. He scores a 90% with the Constitution, but the part he sucks at is civil liberties and the war. He is great fiscally but he will take all of our private liberties away in the name of the war on terror

TheDriver
11-07-2010, 03:16 PM
Pence isn't perfect, but he's still a lot better than most of the house Republicans. And I imagine Rand would've voted for the military commissions act as well. He has said that he supports military tribunals for terrorists. The only other alternative would be to import terrorists into the U.S. and try them in civilian courts, which would end up costing taxpayers a lot of money.

Pence also supported the airline bailout after 9-11. ;)

MRoCkEd
11-07-2010, 03:18 PM
And I imagine Rand would've voted for the military commissions act as well. He has said that he supports military tribunals for terrorists.
I would hope not. That Act allowed torture, arbitrary detention of American citizens as unlawful enemy combatants at the full discretion of Bush (now Obama) without the right of habeas corpus, and approved warrantless searches by the NSA. Not to mention it gave the president the power to imprison individuals based on secret testimony.

Brett85
11-07-2010, 03:23 PM
I would hope not. That Act allowed torture, arbitrary detention of American citizens as unlawful enemy combatants at the full discretion of Bush (now Obama) without the right of habeas corpus, and approved warrantless searches by the NSA. Not to mention it gave the president the power to imprison individuals based on secret testimony.

I didn't realize that it allowed all of those things. I just thought it was a bill designed to set up military tribunals for terrorist suspects.

anaconda
11-07-2010, 03:53 PM
Rand nailed it in every imaginable way. He's really got his talking points down now. I think he went in through the back door of fiscal responsibility to establish himself outright as non-interventionist. And, may I say, he seemed utterly Presidential. A+ interview.

Melissa
11-07-2010, 03:55 PM
Rand nailed it in every imaginable way. He's really got his talking points down now. I think he went in through the back door of fiscal responsibility to establish himself outright as non-interventionist. And, may I say, he seemed utterly Presidential. A+ interview.

+1 now we watch his votes

BenIsForRon
11-07-2010, 04:20 PM
It was a good interview overall.

The one thing Rand needs to do now is draw attention to himself, maybe by suggesting a major cut, like ending ethanol subsidies outright. He needs to cement his position as one of the most important senators before he gets there. Then, senators will try to appear by his side and support his initiatives so they seem credible to the voters.

anaconda
11-07-2010, 04:33 PM
Rand needs to really get his Civil Rights talking points down because the question will return. He needs to go hugely on the offensive that his deep yearn for a color blind society was foiled and held back by government bungling and intervention. And, how much more integrated we would be today without private property violation and government quotas. And at the same time reinforce that nationwide abolishment of Jim Crow laws was absolutely appropriate.

low preference guy
11-07-2010, 04:48 PM
Rand needs to really get his Civil Rights talking points down because the question will return. He needs to go hugely on the offensive that his deep yearn for a color blind society was foiled and held back by government bungling and intervention. And, how much more integrated we would be today without private property violation and government quotas. And at the same time reinforce that nationwide abolishment of Jim Crow laws was absolutely appropriate.

I don't think he will return to that issue. If they ask him, he'll give a 2 seconds answer and brush the topic aside.

Plus he won't get support for that issue, because no one cares about the CRA right now. People care about not being unemployed and having a vibrant economy again. Talking about CRA is a luxury that most Americans can't waste time on, considering the other problems they have ($$$).

samforpaul
11-07-2010, 05:28 PM
If I had one word to describe Rand's performance it would be the word, ASSERTIVE. No mincing words, he got right to the point or perhaps I should say points.

sofia
11-07-2010, 05:31 PM
he was too vague...not bold enough....

and what's with quoting Bernanke as if Helicopter Ben is some sage?

He missed an opportunity to blast the money printing that the Fed just kicked off

klamath
11-07-2010, 05:38 PM
Great interview. I really see in Rand an eagerness to get to washington so he has access to information he didn't have as a private citizen. All this new information will be added to a brain that is very well grounded in a strong limited government philosophy. He doesn't want to make statements on specifics unto he has all the info and facts before him. To go off half cocked and make statements he might have to retract when he gets all the info will not do him or the movement a damned bit of good.

misconstrued
11-07-2010, 05:39 PM
I remember hearing Rand speak at an event several years ago during his father's presidential campaign and thinking, "Wow, he is good. He needs to get in politics." This was long before any talk of a Senate run. I really think he will run for President 6 to 12 years out and he has a damn good chance to win.

HarryBrowneLives
11-07-2010, 07:11 PM
Rand did just perfect ... perfect. There is a reason this man is a Senator! Everybody is for less government in general and against it specifically. The second he names some little program, the Lefty's will scream your grandma is going to get thrown out on the street in the dead of winter. RP didn't fall for it. Bravo!;)

HarryBrowneLives
11-07-2010, 07:14 PM
From what I've seen and heard from RP since the election I think he'll be far more toward us than what he was during the election. Rand's dyed in the wool ... maybe a bit closet at times when he needs to be ... but dyed in the wool small L libertarian @ heart.;)

vita3
11-07-2010, 08:36 PM
I honestly thought he did a fantastic job with her.

anaconda
11-07-2010, 09:00 PM
I don't think he will return to that issue. If they ask him, he'll give a 2 seconds answer and brush the topic aside.

Plus he won't get support for that issue, because no one cares about the CRA right now. People care about not being unemployed and having a vibrant economy again. Talking about CRA is a luxury that most Americans can't waste time on, considering the other problems they have ($$$).


I believe your assessment is more accurate than mine, upon reflection. The 2 second answer with brush off should be OK. The libertarian style objection to the CRA is well documented and explained elsewhere, anyhow. Rand could just say "Google libertarian solutions to racism" and you'll get my position...

anaconda
11-07-2010, 09:01 PM
From what I've seen and heard from RP since the election I think he'll be far more toward us than what he was during the election. Rand's dyed in the wool ... maybe a bit closet at times when he needs to be ... but dyed in the wool small L libertarian @ heart.;)

Yep. Looks like he was completely trustworthy.:) This is exciting.

anaconda
11-07-2010, 09:02 PM
Rand did just perfect ... perfect. There is a reason this man is a Senator! Everybody is for less government in general and against it specifically. The second he names some little program, the Lefty's will scream your grandma is going to get thrown out on the street in the dead of winter. RP didn't fall for it. Bravo!;)

Ditto.

sofia
11-07-2010, 09:15 PM
Rand did just perfect ... perfect. There is a reason this man is a Senator! Everybody is for less government in general and against it specifically. The second he names some little program, the Lefty's will scream your grandma is going to get thrown out on the street in the dead of winter. RP didn't fall for it. Bravo!;)

yeah...let's keep allowing the left to set the rules of debate..so that they wont yell at us...

how is that working out for us? :rolleyes:

sorry...but there is no way out of this mess without a bare knucles brawl against the left..and the "moderates"..

Rand is showing that he doesnt have the stomach to speak the truth. Had that been his dad on This Week , Ron would not have hesitated to tick off the names of every department and program that he would kill.....including the damn FED.

Rand is OK....but he aint ever gonna be able to fill his dad's shoes.

Brett85
11-07-2010, 09:19 PM
yeah...let's keep allowing the left to set the rules of debate..so that they wont yell at us...

how is that working out for us? :rolleyes:

sorry...but there is no way out of this mess without a bare knucles brawl against the left..and the "moderates"..

Rand is showing that he doesnt have the stomach to speak the truth. Had that been his dad on This Week , Ron would not have hesitated to tick off the names of every department and program that he would kill.....including the damn FED.

Rand is OK....but he aint ever gonna be able to fill his dad's shoes.

Ron mostly just talks about cutting foreign policy spending. I've never heard him give a detailed analysis of what domestic spending he would cut.

Brett85
11-07-2010, 09:29 PM
Does anybody know who decides whether Rand will be on the budget committee or not? Do they typically allow freshmen Senators to be on the budget committee?

sailingaway
11-07-2010, 09:45 PM
Does anybody know who decides whether Rand will be on the budget committee or not? Do they typically allow freshmen Senators to be on the budget committee?

He said he was hoping to be. Rumor has it they intend to give good assignments to tea party candidates specifically so they have something to lose, so there will be some control over them. I don't think he would have said he hoped to be on that committee unless he knew the possibility was at least under discussion.