Rand Paul in a few weeks is running Circles Around his Dad

[AuH20]

Does he know how to use the media to his advantage or what?
Force the old guard in the Senate to recognize the validity of his 500 billion dollar cut package?
Recognize the hypocrisy of funding Arab nations that are hostile to Israel?
Seize the mantle of leadership in a barren landscape of conservative wanna-bes?

I love Ron but his son is a professional to such a degree that he's simply too wise to trip up. You would think that he's a three-term senator with the clout he's commanding on the hill.

[Sola_Fide]

We probably could have avoided destruction if we had more Rand Paul's in the past few decades...

[specsaregood]

I love Ron but his son is a professional to such a degree that he's simply too wise to trip up. You would think that he's a three-term senator with the clout he's commanding on the hill.

I know what you are saying; but none of that would have been possible if his father had not paved the way. Or the lessons Rand learned from his father's pursuits.

[AuH20]

We probably could have avoided destruction if we had more Rand Paul's in the past few decades...

Next chess move is the fillibustering of the debt ceiling if certain budgetary constraints aren't made.

[BamaFanNKy]

I know what you are saying; but none of that would have been possible if his father had not paved the way. Or the lessons Rand learned from his father's pursuits.

Also learned from his father's mistakes. LOVE Congressman Paul. Sometimes he's the bullhorn who says what he means but, it hurts him. Senator Paul, he's more calculated and will have more "Higher" office chances since he plays the game better. Granted, he learned by watching his dad:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-Elr5K2Vuo

[sailingaway]

WTF? Ron doesn't have the ability in the House to bring things to the floor. Rand hasn't done anything Ron hasn't done, his microphone is just bigger in the Senate, and he wouldn't be IN the Senate if he didn't have credibility from Ron's record. And Rand still doesn't have the record of standing up against pressure when what he is doing is NOT popular. Ron carried this for 30 years with NO national movement backing him -- until he inspired one. I'm not saying Rand isn't up to doing as much, but you give very little weight to the economic moment Ron didn't have to springboard off of in younger days, and you seem to give a ton of weight to very superficial things. LOTS of good actors make their home in Congress, it's the real deals who are rare, and only time can prove that beyond doubt.

I'm absolutely in Rand's corner, but why on earth would you want to phrase a compliment to Rand as an insult to his father?

[specsaregood]

Also learned from his father's mistakes. LOVE Congressman Paul. Sometimes he's the bullhorn who says what he means but, it hurts him. Senator Paul, he's more calculated and will have more "Higher" office chances since he plays the game better. Granted, he learned by watching his dad:

I thought that was implied; but true enough. And "hurts him" is subjective. Would he have gotten as much passionate support had he not used that bullhorn? Maybe Rand's plays are only possible because of those moves that "hurt him". Like sacrificing a piece for a superior position.

[AuH20]

WTF? Ron doesn't have the ability in the House to bring things to the floor. Rand hasn't done anything Ron hasn't done, his microphone is just bigger in the Senate, and he wouldn't be IN the Senate if he didn't have credibility from Ron's record. And Rand still doesn't have the record of standing up against pressure when what he is doing is NOT popular. Ron carried this for 30 years with NO national movement backing him -- until he inspired one. I'm not saying Rand isn't up to doing as much, but you give very little weight to the economic moment Ron didn't have to springboard off of in younger days, and you seem to give a ton of weight to very superficial things. LOTS of good actors make their home in Congress, it's the real deals who are rare, and only time can prove that beyond doubt.


I'm waiting for Ron to subpoena Ben Bernanke.

[BamaFanNKy]

I thought that was implied; but true enough. And "hurts him" is subjective. Would he have gotten as much passionate support had he not used that bullhorn? Maybe Rand's plays are only possible because of those moves that "hurt him". Like sacrificing a piece for a superior position.

What gets us freaks amped up turns him off to the partisan hacks.

They get a wet one for crap like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ruNrdmjcNTc

Where we get excited over:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FG2PUZoukfA

One likes to be told they are part of something perfect while the other group wants to make the country perfect.

[sailingaway]

I thought that was implied; but true enough. And "hurts him" is subjective. Would he have gotten as much passionate support had he not used that bullhorn? Maybe Rand's plays are only possible because of those moves that "hurt him". Like sacrificing a piece for a superior position.

Often SOMEONE needs to say something -- as with Wikileaks. Remember the witchhunt that was brewing when Ron alone would stand up to it? Such freedom of the media that we have was under very real risk. Remember Feinstein and Liebermann racing to dust off the 1917 espionage act to 'improve it'? Yeah, he pays a price and Rand has the luxury of letting Ron do it. I am fine if Ron wants to make this a good cop bad cop, for strategic reasons, but WE should know the difference.

[sailingaway]

I'm waiting for Ron to subpoena Ben Bernanke.

Because the last 30 years aren't good enough for you but Rand has done more of substance? He is responsible for how much of the country now wants the Fed audited. But that counts for nothing? Ron will show he is reasonable first, and get the public on his side. THEN he will subpoena Bernanke.

[AuH20]

Because the last 30 years aren't good enough for you but Rand has done more of substance? He is responsible for how much of the country now wants the Fed audited. But that counts for nothing? Ron will show he is reasonable first, and get the public on his side. THEN he will subpoena Bernanke.

I hope you're right.

[Sola_Fide]

I was under the impression that the subpeona power had to go through the higher committee.

Is this right?

[low preference guy]

I'm waiting for Ron to subpoena Ben Bernanke.

Not only Rand Paul has a LONGGGGGGGGGG way to go. So does his father Ron!

I'm close, but I still just can't trust them. It's a little feeling I have; it is rarely wrong.

[sailingaway]

I was under the impression that the subpeona power had to go through the higher committee.

Is this right?

I'm pretty sure it has to be approved by the head of the banking committee, and if Ron gives him good reasons and delivers support (through us), he has a good shot. But he has to do it right. Some people seem much more willing to see that Rand needs to play certain games, but give no leeway for someone who has a 30 year record of consistency to build a basis to convince others.

[AuH20]

Not only Rand Paul has a LONGGGGGGGGGG way to go. So does his father Ron!

I'm close, but I still just can't trust them. It's a little feeling I have; it is rarely wrong.

If Rand fillibusters the debt ceiling for whatever reason, he moves past his dad in terms of my effectiveness scale. Such a monumental act of defiance would probably make him public enemy #1 and national folk hero at the same time. It would also create a much needed national dialogue about the lunacy of unsustainable deficits.

[driller80545]

Rand is a better at explaining himself than Ron is. Sometimes Ron talks over my head while Rand does not. I take the time to figure out what Ron is trying to say, but about 93% of the voting Repubs and the MSM don't bother. Ron assumes people are smarter than they really are. He would be better understood were he to dumb down his agenda.

[sailingaway]

Not only Rand Paul has a LONGGGGGGGGGG way to go. So does his father Ron!

I'm close, but I still just can't trust them. It's a little feeling I have; it is rarely wrong.

You know, I've read this sort of thing once or twice before, and all I can say is if you can't trust someone with a 30 year consistent record who has taken massive slings and arrows for sticking to that record, what manifestation would ever be sufficient for you?

[Sola_Fide]

If Rand fillibusters the debt ceiling for whatever reason, he moves past his dad in terms of my effectiveness scale. Such a monumental act of defiance would probably make him public enemy #1 and national folk hero at the same time. It would also create a much needed national dialogue about the lunacy of unsustainable deficits.

Nah. Theres no reason to pit them against each other, right? They are like a two-headed liberty dragon that can't be slayed:)

[AuH20]

Nah. Theres no reason to pit them against each other, right? They are like a two-headed liberty dragon that can't be slayed:)

But for some reason (wink), the younger doesn't seem to care if he's re-elected. I know Ron is at the end of the line but he has exhibited political survival instincts in the past.

[Guitarzan]

Jimi Hendrix is to Stevie Ray Vaughan what Ron is to Rand. (besides the biological relation)


Who's better? Who can know...

Stevie is a much cleaner player than Hendrix ever was. But Hendrix was pure and raunchy, ugly and beautiful all within the same note...too ugly for many to understand. Stevie took that and packaged it into a more "commercial" sound, and was very successful...even to the point of being considered a guitar God.

Most people you would ask would say that SRV was a better player, but the ones who dig a little deeper realize that there would have been no SRV without Hendrix, and that Hendrix's creativity and understanding were coming from a point of purity that SRV, who would himself admit, could never fully realize.

Ahhh all my heroes in one post....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIprkGupeKw&feature=related

[sailingaway]

Rand is a better at explaining himself than Ron is. Sometimes Ron talks over my head while Rand does not. I take the time to figure out what Ron is trying to say, but about 93% of the voting Repubs and the MSM don't bother. Ron assumes people are smarter than they really are. He would be better understood were he to dumb down his agenda.

And yet Rand has missed stuff because he either doesn't have Ron's depth of knowledge or it doesn't come to him, as well. I am not saying this against Rand. I think in the end Rand will have opportunities Ron won't and part of that is due to a more direct speaking style; but.... nevermind. I don't want to get into 'but;'. I am very pleased with Rand but he hasn't earned quite the place with me yet that his father has. And when he does, it will still be different. He will NEVER have had to go 30 years pushing entirely unpopular positions without the ego gratification of large crowds wherever he goes, and just his character to keep him consistent. He does speak in a more marketable fashion.

[sailingaway]

If Rand fillibusters the debt ceiling for whatever reason, he moves past his dad in terms of my effectiveness scale. Such a monumental act of defiance would probably make him public enemy #1 and national folk hero at the same time. It would also create a much needed national dialogue about the lunacy of unsustainable deficits.

Because you think for half a second Ron wouldn't have done that every time if the House had that power?

[specsaregood]

You know, I've read this sort of thing once or twice before, and all I can say is if you can't trust someone with a 30 year consistent record who has taken massive slings and arrows for sticking to that record, what manifestation would ever be sufficient for you?

Well that whole water into wine thing could be cool....and that'd probably get some of those drunks on the hill on his side.

[Sola_Fide]

But for some reason (wink), the younger doesn't seem to care if he's re-elected. I know Ron is at the end of the line but he has exhibited political survival instincts in the past.

Really? Like when? Just curious where you are coming from...

[AuH20]

Really? Like when? Just curious where you are coming from...

To paraphrase Matt Collins, Ron had to build up his cred in his district by taking some non-Ron Paul positions, namely all the pork to the local shrimping lobby.

[low preference guy]

But for some reason (wink), the younger doesn't seem to care if he's re-elected. I know Ron is at the end of the line but he has exhibited political survival instincts in the past.

LOL! Apparently you didn't watch the Rachel Maddow interview. That's not how someone who doesn't care about being elected answers a question.

By the way, I support 100% Rand's response. But it contradicts your point.

[Chieppa1]

But for some reason (wink), the younger doesn't seem to care if he's re-elected. I know Ron is at the end of the line but he has exhibited political survival instincts in the past.

Because. He. Was. The. Only. Voice. In. Congress.

He HAD to.

Rand DOESN'T.....because of his father.

I really don't see the confusion.

[sailingaway]

To paraphrase Matt Collins, Ron had to build up his cred in his district by taking some non-Ron Paul positions, namely all the pork to the local shrimping lobby.

That isn't a non-Ron position. I think Ron has the right of that issue, and Rand doesn't. SELLING your vote is different, and a lot of people trying to steal Ron's 'excuse' are laughable because unlike him, they give their vote for the earmarks. Ron always votes against it, and is quite right about where the Constitution puts the purse strings.

Rand just wants to cut spending and doesn't appear to as much care about the formalistic niceties in the face of the emergency. Because I REALLY see the Constitution as our shield, I am against eroding it on any front.

[driller80545]

And yet Rand has missed stuff because he either doesn't have Ron's depth of knowledge or it doesn't come to him, as well. I am not saying this against Rand. I think in the end Rand will have opportunities Ron won't and part of that is due to a more direct speaking style; but.... nevermind. I don't want to get into 'but;'. I am very pleased with Rand but he hasn't earned quite the place with me yet that his father has. And when he does, it will still be different. He will NEVER have had to go 30 years pushing entirely unpopular positions without the ego gratification of large crowds wherever he goes, and just his character to keep him consistent. He does speak in a more marketable fashion.

+++

[AuH20]

That isn't a non-Ron position. I think Ron has the right of that issue, and Rand doesn't. SELLING your vote is different, and a lot of people trying to steal Ron's 'excuse' are laughable because unlike him, they give their vote for the earmarks. Ron always votes against it, and is quite right about where the Constitution puts the purse strings.

Here's my thoughts on the Ron/Rand relationship:

(1) based on their respective histories Ron is much more a politician than his son is. Rand seems content at being a one-term senator, which he recently stated in the ABC News interview.
(2) Rand has been afforded certain advantages because of his father's national standing. Obviously, he is standing on the shoulder of a giant, but his courage should not be overlooked. He could have simply blended in as soon as he arrived in D.C.

[Chieppa1]

When people ask me who I support, and the name "Rand Paul" comes out instead of "Ron Paul" then maybe I'll think about it.

[low preference guy]

Here's my thoughts on the Ron/Rand relationship:

(1) based on their respective histories Ron is much more a politician than his son is. Rand seems content at being a one-term senator, which he recently stated in the ABC News interview.
(2) Rand has been afforded certain advantages because of his father's national standing. Obviously, he is standing on the shoulder of a giant, but his courage should not be overlooked. He could have simply blended in as soon as he arrived in D.C.

Yes. The "more a politician" is the one who says the Civil War shouldn't have been fought...

The "less a politician" says he would've voted for the Civil Rights Act.

Hmmm...

[sailingaway]

Here's my thoughts on the Ron/Rand relationship:

(1) based on their respective histories Ron is much more a politician than his son is. Rand seems content at being a one-term senator, which he recently stated in the ABC News interview.
(2) Rand has been afforded certain advantages because of his father's national standing. Obviously, he is standing on the shoulder of a giant, but his courage should not be overlooked. He could have simply blended in as soon as he arrived in D.C.

I so disagree with the 'more a politician' thing. I think 'your issue' is one currently politically popular and Rand happens to be making it his signature issue. So you are happy. Fine. But that is POPULAR now, not as unpopular as when Ron was saying it, regardless.

[low preference guy]

..

[sailingaway]

..

LOL!!

Thanks for that. I'm getting off this thread now. I like them both.

[AuH20]

I so disagree with the 'more a politician' thing. I think 'your issue' is one currently politically popular and Rand happens to be making it his signature issue. So you are happy. Fine. But that is POPULAR now, not as unpopular as when Ron was saying it, regardless.

We will find out if Ron's rhetoric transcends into action as head of the sub-committee. And the same thing applies to Rand as junior senator of Kentucky. I'm led to believe he will filibuster if certain budgetary limits are not in place. I want see action in the face of hostility.

[AuH20]

And yet Rand has missed stuff because he either doesn't have Ron's depth of knowledge or it doesn't come to him, as well. I am not saying this against Rand. I think in the end Rand will have opportunities Ron won't and part of that is due to a more direct speaking style; but.... nevermind. I don't want to get into 'but;'. I am very pleased with Rand but he hasn't earned quite the place with me yet that his father has. And when he does, it will still be different. He will NEVER have had to go 30 years pushing entirely unpopular positions without the ego gratification of large crowds wherever he goes, and just his character to keep him consistent. He does speak in a more marketable fashion.

I disagree. Rand is a far superior speaker and utilizes classical references to illustrate his points. There is nothing dumbed down about his rhetoric He referenced the sword of Damocles in his SOTU rebuttal and in the past has referenced Dostoyevsky and The Brothers Karamazov. Rand is more educated than Ron, thus speaks better. And let me reiterate that I don't think Ron is some intellectual lightweight, but his son is very special.

[sailingaway]

I disagree. Rand is a far superior speaker and utilizes classical references to illustrate his points. There is nothing dumbed down about his rhetoric He referenced the sword of Damocles in his SOTU rebuttal and in the past has referenced Dostoyevsky and The Brothers Karamazov. Rand is more educated than Ron, thus speaks better. And let me reiterate that I don't think Ron is some intellectual lightweight, but his son is very special.

dropping quotes can be showy rather than substantive. It isn't enough to demonstrate comprehension. Everyone has speech writers after all.

I do think Rand has an unusual level of comprehension, but it isn't the sword of Damocles that persuades me of that.

[low preference guy]

dropping quotes can be showy rather than substantive. It isn't enough to demonstrate comprehension. Everyone has speech writers after all.

I do think Rand has an unusual level of comprehension, but it isn't the sword of Damocles that persuades me of that.

Also, Ron has a better understanding of Austrian Economics. So I don't think Rand is more educated.

[Feeding the Abscess]

Ron's subpoena would have to go through John Bo(-eh)ner. Think about that, AuH20. Then continue bitching about why Ron hasn't sent the subpoena to Helicopter Ben yet.