View Full Version : The Official "I Unfairly Underestimated Rand Paul and Wish to Atone Publicly" Thread
BuddyRey
02-09-2011, 07:55 PM
This is just my attempt to man up and admit that I was totally wrong about Rand Paul when I suspected him of being less principled than his dad. So far, he's turned out to be an absolutely stellar defender of liberty, far exceeding my very highest expectations.
Rand, you're doing a bang-up job, and I'm sorry I ever doubted you! You've got big government politicos in all parties on the run, and you have my utmost respect, encouragement, and kudos. Give 'em Hell, kid!
NewRightLibertarian
02-09-2011, 07:57 PM
I gave him the benefit of the doubt and defended him to people who bought the spin (including my good Ron Paul-supporting liberaltarian buddy), but he's surprised even me with how great he is doing! This guy is fantastic! A real chip off the whole block and I think he will win the Presidency in 2016 if he runs.
RoamZero
02-09-2011, 08:03 PM
Usually the apple doesn't fall far from the tree but I think some skepticism is better than nepotism.
Flash
02-09-2011, 08:03 PM
I never underestimated Rand Paul. His campaign was similar to Ron Paul's first congressional campaign. I don't know why people were so damn critical of him.
sailingaway
02-09-2011, 08:06 PM
Well said!! Since more people are in a listening mood, do you remember his promise in his campaign?
I want to take a moment to remind you why I am not your typical politician, and why this is not a typical campaign or movement. Among the many reasons:
I will never, ever vote for a taxpayer bailout of a private industry. Whether it’s big banks, automakers, or any other industry — you succeed or fail on your own.
I will not vote for an unbalanced budget. I will not vote for a tax increase. Ever.
I will fight for new rules like a Balanced Budget Amendment and Term Limits.
I will not take ANYTHING off the table in the fight to balance the budget. Anyone who says something like they will “freeze non-defense discretionary spending” is blowing smoke at you and hoping you won’t notice. That would balance the budget — MAYBE — in about 80 years.
We have to keep our promises to seniors and keep our country strong, but every area has things that can be cut. Every agency has things that are duplicative or that could be done better or cheaper.
I will propose and force a vote on an Enumerated Powers Act, to force Congress to point to the part of the Constitution that justifies their bills.
I will fight for the Bill of Rights. Democrats often love the 4th amendment. Republicans the 2nd. I will fight for them all, which means fighting for your free speech, gun rights, and civil liberties. Laws that infringe on ANY of these make the federal government more powerful, and we cannot continue to allow that.
I will not allow our troops to be the world’s policeman, and I will force a vote on a Declaration of War if any President seeks to commit our military to battle.
What you’ve just read above is an agenda unlike any politician in the country. While solidly conservative, it also shows first, a great loyalty to the Constitution and to our freedom. You cannot fight for liberty while voting for bills that embolden the state.
You cannot fight for some of our founding rights without others. And you cannot enable change in Washington by sending the same old people there.
http://www.randpaul2010.com/2010/08/not-your-typical-politician-rands-plan/
BuddyRey
02-09-2011, 09:37 PM
I never underestimated Rand Paul. His campaign was similar to Ron Paul's first congressional campaign. I don't know why people were so damn critical of him.
Well, I can only speak for myself, but in my case, I just didn't hear the fiery libertarian rhetoric coming from Rand which had made me such an instant fan of Ron, and that was a bit disconcerting. I figured there was a good chance Rand wouldn't be "just another Republican conservative", but that's how he sounded, so I think I was trying to brace myself for disappointment.
Like I said though, these last couple weeks of Rand being a Senator have been amazing, and he's gotten more accomplished than I ever would have imagined. Now that he's in office, he's really delivering on and continuing the legacy of his father, so I couldn't be happier.
Feeding the Abscess
02-09-2011, 09:44 PM
Usually the apple doesn't fall far from the tree but I think some skepticism is better than nepotism.
This. I've been critical of Rand here, but I'm the resident Rand-bot everywhere else.
Baptist
02-09-2011, 09:54 PM
I was critical of Rand but have been VERY impressed with him the last month.
AlexMerced
02-09-2011, 09:54 PM
I'm fairly pleased, I expected him to be good, but he definetley impressed me with his boldness over the last month. Rand Paul 2016 fo shiz
anaconda
02-09-2011, 10:04 PM
My biggest surprise about Rand is how silky smooth he is politically. I was a tad nervous when there was all that fluff about him meeting with the Bill Kristol gang. I now realize that Rand is in this to lead and be the real deal and win hearts and minds. The whole thing is beyond awesome.
I am betting he will "run" for POTUS in 2012, if it means nothing more than officially announcing simply to join the debates. He will have no problem justifying his run to the naysayers.
TXcarlosTX
02-09-2011, 10:08 PM
Rand is doing everything I thought he would do. He played "the game" to get elected. Now he is changing the game to the benefit of the "The People". I'm very proud of Rand.
The Dark Knight
02-09-2011, 10:20 PM
Rand has also exceeded my expectations, instead of moving to the center, he has moved towards Liberty.
Anti Federalist
02-09-2011, 10:22 PM
I crabbed as well from time to time.
But so far things are going very well.
MRoCkEd
02-09-2011, 10:27 PM
While I understood he was being very careful in the campaign, and that he was a true libertarian in his heart, I always had that doubt in the back of my mind about him selling out. Fortunately, he is doing a great job.
EndSlavery
02-09-2011, 10:31 PM
I underestimated his political acumen. Did not understimate his philosophical principles.
akforme
02-09-2011, 10:33 PM
Add me to the list, I was critical, and skeptical, but I've been overwhelmingly pleased so far.
AtomiC
02-09-2011, 11:06 PM
Rand Paul is a true freedom lover, just like his father!
:D
Tinnuhana
02-09-2011, 11:12 PM
Fozz?
Anti Federalist
02-09-2011, 11:37 PM
Fozz?
Banned
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?264992-ITT-Fozz-being-a-genius-not-a-debbie-downer.&p=3085173&viewfull=1#post3085173
speciallyblend
02-09-2011, 11:46 PM
I am almost there:) I would like some clarification on personal private marijuana use and medical marijuana use;) see ya at cpac Ron Paul 2012
Fredom101
02-09-2011, 11:49 PM
Did he change his stance on Afghanistan and Guantanamo yet?
I blasted him about a year ago. I changed my mind well before now, however. I also think that I've expressed it a bunch of times by now. I realized that elections are nasty and what really matters is how someone votes and legislates once they arrive. So far I am pleased that I backed off and was willing to give Rand a chance.
Did he change his stance on Afghanistan and Guantanamo yet?
Are you sure you really understand his stance? At this point isn't better to see how he would vote in such a situation?
Chase
02-09-2011, 11:56 PM
He has me embarrassed to admit I donated to him only once. I was donating to Schiff too, would have loved to have them both... but Rand is definitely besting my expectations. Thanks to all those who did far more than I to help get him in!
Justinjj1
02-10-2011, 12:15 AM
I take back ever calling him a neocon, he clearly is not. But, I'm still not completely sold on him and I'm not willing to eat my words just yet.
My problems with him have always been about the wars and foreign policy, and he still has done nothing to alleviate my concerns. I like his stance on the Patriot Act and on ending foreign aid, but he remains conspicuoulsy silent about the wasted money in Afghanistan and Iraq. His budget proposal was decent I guess, but a 6% decrease in military spending is pretty much a joke. However, his term just started and I might end up apologizing and becoming his biggest fan before the end of it.
So far, he's about like I expected, an above-average Republican Senator, but nothing for me to get too excited about.
sailingaway
02-10-2011, 12:21 AM
I take back ever calling him a neocon, he clearly is not. But, I'm still not completely sold on him and I'm not willing to eat my words just yet.
My problems with him have always been about the wars and foreign policy, and he still has done nothing to alleviate my concerns. I like his stance on the Patriot Act and on ending foreign aid, but he remains conspicuoulsy silent about the wasted money in Afghanistan and Iraq. His budget proposal was decent I guess, but a 6% decrease in military spending is pretty much a joke. However, his term just started and I might end up apologizing and becoming his biggest fan before the end of it.
So far, he's about like I expected, an above-average Republican Senator, but nothing for me to get too excited about.
Uh, did you see where he said that a president controls troop movements but that if he were president he would have to ask why we spend $100 billion a year chasing 100 terrorists in Afghanistan?
Check out his subway interview.
jtstellar
02-10-2011, 01:18 AM
lol@the "i doubted him just in case, but *almost luckily he turned out alright" posts
yaya we're all here to please you the select few who are just so far better principled than the rest of us
daviddee
02-10-2011, 01:44 AM
...
__27__
02-10-2011, 02:14 AM
Do you really win either way? He was very hawkish and bordering on a neo-tea partier (you know all those who just voted to extent PATRIOT) in his campaign rhetoric. If he now legislates differently, much as I may like it, isn't he just the same old politician then? Promising one thing on the trail and voting another thing in office? Don't you think that's bound to piss off some of the on-the-neo-con-fencers that put him in office? And wouldn't that be short term gain for long term pain?
The criticisms against him during the rhetoric campaign were fair, if he chooses to vote differently now I'm more than glad, but I have to wonder if it's really the big win you think it is, or if he'll be seen as just another politician and his causes discredited with closed ears not willing to listen to the backtracking of another politician.
I sincerely hope I'm wrong.
TroySmith
02-10-2011, 06:16 AM
To me, Rand has POTUS written all over him. As the Republican party continues to either divide or remold into a more fiscally conservative and constitutional party he stands out as the natural leader of that new party. I think once the debt ceiling issue officially arises we will start seeing Rand become as well known as figures like McCain and Kerry and that's a good sign given a lot of politics is a popularity contest.
Southron
02-10-2011, 06:41 AM
I figured he would turn out alright but I do not want to see him run for President anytime soon. Having a Senator is more valuable IMO.
jtstellar
02-10-2011, 06:59 AM
I sincerely hope I'm wrong.
Nono don't switch side now.. Just stick with your side.. It doesn't matter what he does this point on any longer
What's done is done.. Don't do exactly what you criticized him for--Looking wishy washy
Krugerrand
02-10-2011, 07:04 AM
I never underestimated Rand Paul. His campaign was similar to Ron Paul's first congressional campaign. I don't know why people were so damn critical of him.
I was always willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. But look around at how many people started spouting RP's words and have no intention of following through with them. How many people co-sponsored Audit the Fed and then voted to gut the audit? Part of what makes Ron Paul amazing is that he has been virtually 100% consistent throughout his political career. (I believe he had a very reasonable death penalty conversion along the way.) That consistency is something on which, of course, Rand Paul cannot yet run.
Fortunately, it's looking promising that someday he will be able to.
jtstellar
02-10-2011, 07:09 AM
I was always willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. But look around at how many people started spouting RP's words and have no intention of following through with them. How many people co-sponsored Audit the Fed and then voted to gut the audit? Part of what makes Ron Paul amazing is that he has been virtually 100% consistent throughout his political career. (I believe he had a very reasonable death penalty conversion along the way.) That consistency is something on which, of course, Rand Paul cannot yet run.
Fortunately, it's looking promising that someday he will be able to.
I would support him if he ran.. Calling out every single senior senator the first week after getting into office isn't something a person who doesn't already know what he is doing/believing can accomplish
As someone who's older than most on this board and a lifelong liberty activist since his teenage years, he's more than qualified. Do people think about what they're asking? On one hand they appreciate the private sector experience and bash D.C. for being out of touch, then they turn around and ask for people to spend 30% of their life there to "prove themselves". Talk about being self contradictory.
teacherone
02-10-2011, 07:09 AM
never doubted.
he's the manchurian libertarian.
Sola_Fide
02-10-2011, 07:13 AM
Do you really win either way? He was very hawkish and bordering on a neo-tea partier (you know all those who just voted to extent PATRIOT) in his campaign rhetoric. If he now legislates differently, much as I may like it, isn't he just the same old politician then? Promising one thing on the trail and voting another thing in office? Don't you think that's bound to piss off some of the on-the-neo-con-fencers that put him in office? And wouldn't that be short term gain for long term pain?
The criticisms against him during the rhetoric campaign were fair, if he chooses to vote differently now I'm more than glad, but I have to wonder if it's really the big win you think it is, or if he'll be seen as just another politician and his causes discredited with closed ears not willing to listen to the backtracking of another politician.
I sincerely hope I'm wrong.
Rand was not hawkish. He even had to attempt to seem more hawkish because all of these Dixiecrats here in KY kept asking him at every campaign stop is he "was gunna support Isral".
(BTW, Rand always said from the beginning that he was America-first, not Israel-first:))
I witnessed with my own eyes a large crowd at Knob Creek booing Rand when he was speaking against the Patriot Act. Rand has remained consistent.
And you are nitpicking because Rand is leaning more toward liberty now than what many people thoight he was? Come on bro! What's wrong with that? We already see that he is shaping the debate in this ENTIRE COUNTRY. Believe me, the neocons here in KY are starting to change their mind about war. Rand is WINNING the debate here with a lot of people. The Tea Party movement is becoming more libertarian here in KY...believe me:)
jtstellar
02-10-2011, 07:21 AM
Rand was not hawkish. He even had to attempt to seem more hawkish because all of these Dixiecrats here in KY kept asking him at every campaign stop is he "was gunna support Isral".
(BTW, Rand always said from the beginning that he was America-first, not Israel-first:))
I witnessed with my own eyes a large crowd at Knob Creek booing Rand when he was speaking against the Patriot Act. Rand has remained consistent.
And you are nitpicking because Rand is leaning more toward liberty now than what many people thoight he was? Come on bro! What's wrong with that? We already see that he is shaping the debate in this ENTIRE COUNTRY. Believe me, the neocons here in KY are starting to change their mind about war. Rand is WINNING the debate here with a lot of people. The Tea Party movement is becoming more libertarian here in KY...believe me:)
with all due respect.. it seems he has already made up his mind.
also.. once a nitpicker.. always a nitpicker. it's an ego issue.
sailingaway
02-10-2011, 09:31 AM
I would support him if he ran.. Calling out every single senior senator the first week after getting into office isn't something a person who doesn't already know what he is doing/believing can accomplish
As someone who's older than most on this board and a lifelong liberty activist since his teenage years, he's more than qualified. Do people think about what they're asking? On one hand they appreciate the private sector experience and bash D.C. for being out of touch, then they turn around and ask for people to spend 30% of their life there to "prove themselves". Talk about being self contradictory.
Only because we are fortunate enough to HAVE that alternative in Ron. If Ron decided not to run, and wanted Rand to run, I think you'd find different answers. I sure think Rand, as his own man as well as Ron's son, is better than anyone on the list BESIDES Ron. However, people support Ron here (check out the top of the board...)
low preference guy
02-10-2011, 09:40 AM
Do you really win either way? He was very hawkish and bordering on a neo-tea partier (you know all those who just voted to extent PATRIOT) in his campaign rhetoric. If he now legislates differently, much as I may like it, isn't he just the same old politician then? Promising one thing on the trail and voting another thing in office? Don't you think that's bound to piss off some of the on-the-neo-con-fencers that put him in office? And wouldn't that be short term gain for long term pain?
The criticisms against him during the rhetoric campaign were fair, if he chooses to vote differently now I'm more than glad, but I have to wonder if it's really the big win you think it is, or if he'll be seen as just another politician and his causes discredited with closed ears not willing to listen to the backtracking of another politician.
lol. what a cry baby.
although Rand stated explicitly during the campaign that he opposed the patriot act, that the Afghans weren't taking over their security fast enough, and now he is following up on those promises, you complain about the tone of his rhetoric. what a sad joke.
I sincerely hope I'm wrong.
wrong on what? do you believe he is going to vote for the Patriot Act?
TomtheTinker
02-10-2011, 09:42 AM
Yea.
Ill tell you this I sure like Rand the Senator much more than I like Rand the candidate. Rand really has a way with making history relative and relevant..I really like listening to him speak.
low preference guy
02-10-2011, 09:45 AM
Did he change his stance on Afghanistan and Guantanamo yet?
During the campaign he said the Afghanis weren't taken over their security fast enough, and that many soldiers Rand talked to thought they Afghanis should take over their security. So, do you want him to change his position and say that the U.S. should keep taking care of their security forever?
I supported Rand's campaign with donations. I never doubted for a moment that it was money well spent in the pursuit of liberty.
SilentBull
02-10-2011, 10:24 AM
Never doubted Rand. He understands that to win, you need to be smart. Many in the movement still don't get that.
Fredom101
02-10-2011, 10:38 AM
During the campaign he said the Afghanis weren't taken over their security fast enough, and that many soldiers Rand talked to thought they Afghanis should take over their security. So, do you want him to change his position and say that the U.S. should keep taking care of their security forever?
I just want him to say that the US needs to withdraw from afghanistan immediately. WTF are they doing there anyway? Searching for bin laden? For 9 years? Everyone knows he's dead.
anaconda
02-10-2011, 08:15 PM
To me, Rand has POTUS written all over him. As the Republican party continues to either divide or remold into a more fiscally conservative and constitutional party he stands out as the natural leader of that new party. I think once the debt ceiling issue officially arises we will start seeing Rand become as well known as figures like McCain and Kerry and that's a good sign given a lot of politics is a popularity contest.
And have you noticed that Rand seems more easy going and friendly now that he has become Senator? This adds to his main stream appeal.
Brooklyn Red Leg
02-10-2011, 09:44 PM
Thankfully my fears were abated months ago.
jtstellar
02-11-2011, 10:48 AM
I just want him to say that the US needs to withdraw from afghanistan immediately. WTF are they doing there anyway? Searching for bin laden? For 9 years? Everyone knows he's dead.
Grab a microphone and say it yourself idiot
If everyone has something he wants him to say, when does it end. You grew a mouth did you not. If not, use your fingers.
BuddyRey
02-11-2011, 11:16 AM
Grab a microphone and say it yourself idiot
This is supposed to be a positive thread and an outlet for healing old wounds, not reopening them. I would really appreciate it if you would not call people names here. Many of us are genuinely trying to show contrition for being wrong about Rand, and this kind of negative reception just makes it that much harder for some to put the whole affair behind them.
Fredom101
02-11-2011, 11:17 AM
Grab a microphone and say it yourself idiot
If everyone has something he wants him to say, when does it end. You grew a mouth did you not. If not, use your fingers.
Well, ad hominem attacks on me aren't making your case. :(
sailingaway
02-11-2011, 11:27 AM
Well, ad hominem attacks on me aren't making your case. :(
I'm not sure it was an ad hominum attack. Rand has a style, which is to warm the base up with essentially meaningless puff, then explain why good policy is important. Your way would be confrontational in a way he doesn't seem to see as being most effective. It doesn't mean he isn't trying to be as effective as he possibly can be. It means you just like people to be confrontational, and unless it will do some good, that may not be him. He is less about education than Ron but is in a great place to actually get stuff done if he has cooperation -- which he thinks he won't get being more confrontational than necessary.
So maybe you might consider whether the confrontational role is that important, just in itself, beyond what you as an individual can do.
I find Ron's style more satisfying myself, but Ron also is past the point of being able to change gears. Rand is his own man and wants to try a new approach. And if this same opportunity had presented itself years ago to Ron to actually get stuff done, he also might have gone a different route... but we can never know, of course.
low preference guy
02-11-2011, 02:21 PM
Well, ad hominem attacks on me aren't making your case. :(
actually, he is right.
what matters the most is how Rand votes. if you want something to be said, say it yourself!
low preference guy
02-11-2011, 02:23 PM
I'm not sure it was an ad hominum attack. Rand has a style, which is to warm the base up with essentially meaningless puff, then explain why good policy is important. Your way would be confrontational in a way he doesn't seem to see as being most effective. It doesn't mean he isn't trying to be as effective as he possibly can be. It means you just like people to be confrontational, and unless it will do some good, that may not be him. He is less about education than Ron but is in a great place to actually get stuff done if he has cooperation -- which he thinks he won't get being more confrontational than necessary.
So maybe you might consider whether the confrontational role is that important, just in itself, beyond what you as an individual can do.
I find Ron's style more satisfying myself, but Ron also is past the point of being able to change gears. Rand is his own man and wants to try a new approach. And if this same opportunity had presented itself years ago to Ron to actually get stuff done, he also might have gone a different route... but we can never know, of course.
i agree with many of the things you're saying, but i'd like to point out that the best thing Ron and Rand can do is having different styles.
if they had the same style, they would've attracted exactly the same group of people.
but if we have one straight shooter and someone who is a bit more tactful, then we can attract two different groups of people to the same message.
RonPaulFanInGA
12-29-2012, 07:40 AM
http://lh5.ggpht.com/_2T0Ya_U4gN8/S_TpcgeClHI/AAAAAAAAAIE/ZoYSZG94z4I/toady%20-%20applause02.gif
JK/SEA
12-29-2012, 11:09 AM
always question authority. You can always admit what a douche you are later if you're wrong.
Antischism
12-29-2012, 11:15 AM
Old thread, eh?
whippoorwill
12-29-2012, 11:26 AM
Atone publicly?? F that! He's better than the rest of those asshats in the Senate but thats not saying shit. A 1 day old pile of shit will always look better next to a mountain of week old shit. He can win me over if he filibusters the next Debt Ceiling Increase and/or NDAA with a Indefinite Detention clause and/or Internet take over bill. Untill then I stand by my one and only blog post, Rand can Shove it!
Brett85
12-29-2012, 11:53 AM
Rand has done an absolutely outstanding job as Senator. I believe he may end up going down in history as the greatest Senator of all time.
Rand has done an absolutely outstanding job as Senator. I believe he may end up going down in history as the greatest Senator of all time.help me out w/some Senate liberty history: who would he pass for the top spot(s)?
Brett85
12-29-2012, 12:38 PM
help me out w/some Senate liberty history: who would he pass for the top spot(s)?
Goldwater? Taft?
cajuncocoa
12-29-2012, 12:40 PM
I've criticized him when he's deserved it, but overall he's taken some bold steps in the right direction.
compromise
12-29-2012, 12:48 PM
Goldwater? Taft?
Shipstead and Bricker weren't bad either.
Slutter McGee
12-29-2012, 02:14 PM
Atone publicly?? F that! He's better than the rest of those asshats in the Senate but thats not saying shit. A 1 day old pile of shit will always look better next to a mountain of week old shit. He can win me over if he filibusters the next Debt Ceiling Increase and/or NDAA with a Indefinite Detention clause and/or Internet take over bill. Untill then I stand by my one and only blog post, Rand can Shove it!
Sounds like somebody doesn't know how a filibuster actually works. Doesn't surprise me.
Slutter McGee
Agorism
12-29-2012, 02:41 PM
I still think Romney was a dumb choice for president..
FSP-Rebel
12-29-2012, 03:13 PM
<True believer from the beginning and haven't wavered:cool:
Rudeman
12-29-2012, 05:32 PM
I initially took a wait and see position, but he's won me over as a supporter. Hopefully he keeps it up.
whippoorwill
12-29-2012, 05:50 PM
Sounds like somebody doesn't know how a filibuster actually works. Doesn't surprise me.
Slutter McGee
The filibuster is a powerful parliamentary device in the United States Senate, which in recent years has meant that most major legislation (apart from budgets and confirmations) requires a 60% majority to head off a filibuster. In recent years the majority has preferred to avoid filibusters by moving to other business when a filibuster is threatened and attempts to achieve cloture have failed. Defenders call the filibuster "The Soul of the Senate."
Senate rules permit a senator, or a series of senators, to speak for as long as they wish and on any topic they choose, unless "three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn"(usually 60 out of 100 senators) brings debate to a close by invoking cloture under Senate Rule XXII. According to the Supreme Court ruling in United States v. Ballin (1892), changes to Senate rules could be achieved by a simple majority, but only on the 1st day of the session in January or March. Nevertheless, under current Senate rules, a rule change itself could be filibustered, with two-thirds of those senators present and voting (as opposed to the normal three-fifths of those sworn) needing to vote to break the filibuster. Despite this written requirement, the possibility exists that the filibuster could be changed by majority vote, but only on the 1st day of the session in January or March, using the so-called nuclear option, also sometimes called the constitutional option by proponents. Even if a filibuster attempt is unsuccessful, the process takes floor time
Mr. Slutter McGee would you lend your insight to the process that "somebody doesn't know how a filibuster actually works"?
Brett85
12-29-2012, 05:52 PM
I still think Romney was a dumb choice for president..
Me too. I wish Rand's endorsement of Ron in the GOP primary had caused GOP voters to vote for Ron instead of Romney.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.