PDA

View Full Version : Rand Paul: Pro-drone Republicans are on the wrong side of history




supermario21
03-07-2013, 05:35 PM
Rand sat down with Politico for an exclusive interview.


http://www.politico.com/story/2013/03/paul-pro-drone-gopers-on-wrong-side-of-history-88595.html#ixzz2Mtj87l13

TokenLibertarianGuy
03-07-2013, 05:56 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6OIgDNvRdaE

kcchiefs6465
03-07-2013, 05:59 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6OIgDNvRdaE
Great short clip. I will be sharing it around.


[BUMP]

kcchiefs6465
03-07-2013, 08:00 PM
Hmmm, one bump wasn't enough I see... Bump.

Must watch, explaining more into the problems of drone warfare and who is labeled a enemy combatant.

Kords21
03-07-2013, 08:07 PM
Rand is dominating the front page of politico at the moment. Come what may, he is now officially on the political map as a serious player.

Christian Liberty
03-07-2013, 08:37 PM
And yet Rand endorsed Mitt Romney, a Republican who supports this kind of nonsense and is surrounded by the kind of people.

I think Rand is a good man but he's stuck in a bad system... he has shown a willingness to play the system unlike his dad. I'm also a bit disappointed in his comments of late about the "War on Terror." Those types of comments might have been OK in 2001. At this point its clearly, undeniably just an excuse to take away our freedoms. Rand should flat out condemn it like his father did. Honestly, he's way too moderate for my liking. I'd roll the dice and vote for him, but I acknowledge that I am rolling the dice in doing so. I wish Ron would run again.

Rand is the best we've got right now, but still way, way too moderate.

Even still, he's a hero right now and deserves celebration.

FSP-Rebel
03-07-2013, 08:39 PM
I'll let someone else deal with this^ out

supermario21
03-07-2013, 08:43 PM
I'm confused. Did someone watch his filibuster? The guy was railing against everything Ron did except he was doing it on the Senate floor? New World Order, abuse of the AUMF, mistakes in Iraq, dropping truth bombs. It was incredible.

Christian Liberty
03-07-2013, 09:35 PM
Did Rand actually go full Ron Paul this time? Every time I've heard him speak in the past he sounded like a moderate. A reasonable moderate, but a moderate.

Granted, that "Moderate" is in comparison to the actual, correct, "Defense-only" view on war. Compared to the neo-con War Party (It doesn't matter which branch, Republicans, Democrats, take your pick) he has always seemed more moderate. He also wants to copy Reagan, whereas Ron wants to copy George Washington. Big difference.

Carson
03-07-2013, 09:37 PM
The Obamikado - I've Got a Little List

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1b_gmO7AJS4&feature=player_embedded

Jordan Liberty
03-07-2013, 09:49 PM
And yet Rand endorsed Mitt Romney, a Republican who supports this kind of nonsense and is surrounded by the kind of people.

I think Rand is a good man but he's stuck in a bad system... he has shown a willingness to play the system unlike his dad. I'm also a bit disappointed in his comments of late about the "War on Terror." Those types of comments might have been OK in 2001. At this point its clearly, undeniably just an excuse to take away our freedoms. Rand should flat out condemn it like his father did. Honestly, he's way too moderate for my liking. I'd roll the dice and vote for him, but I acknowledge that I am rolling the dice in doing so. I wish Ron would run again.

Rand is the best we've got right now, but still way, way too moderate.

Even still, he's a hero right now and deserves celebration.
Rand is simply playing politics. I love Ron Paul. He is a man of principle, which is his greatest characteristic, but it doesn't play well with politics. I see that Rand shares some of the same ideas with Ron, but you can obviously see that Rand isn't as principled as Ron, because like you said, he endorsed Romney. But I wouldn't look much into the endorsement. That is just Rand meandering with the GOP establishment, showing that he is a team player. I didn't like the endorsement myself but in the long run I think it will help the liberty movement more than you think. Ron Paul is exactly what the country needs right now, but since he chose to retire, and since the mainstream GOP would never allow Ron to become the Republican nominee for President, the next best thing is his son who shares a lot of Ron's values. And with Rand playing politics it puts him in a better position come 2016 to make a legitimate run for President because the GOP will support him more than his father. You can already see after that filibuster that he is gaining traction in mainstream media, something that Ron was not able to do despite his greatness.

mosquitobite
03-07-2013, 09:52 PM
One thing is for sure. I would actually trust Rand Paul with the powers that have been granted to the executive branch, and I believe he would actually UNDO much of them!

dinosaur
03-07-2013, 10:01 PM
Did Rand actually go full Ron Paul this time? Every time I've heard him speak in the past he sounded like a moderate. A reasonable moderate, but a moderate.

Granted, that "Moderate" is in comparison to the actual, correct, "Defense-only" view on war. Compared to the neo-con War Party (It doesn't matter which branch, Republicans, Democrats, take your pick) he has always seemed more moderate. He also wants to copy Reagan, whereas Ron wants to copy George Washington. Big difference.

Context, Rand seems to intuitively know when to address certain subjects. What is brilliant about Rand, is that he knows when to hold em and when to fold em...and that ability is his bullet proof vest. Had he said the same things in different context, he could have been dismissed and called crazy. Because he waited for the right opportunity and the right context, he was able to advance our ideas and our cause.

Christian Liberty
03-07-2013, 10:09 PM
Rand is simply playing politics. I love Ron Paul. He is a man of principle, which is his greatest characteristic, but it doesn't play well with politics. I see that Rand shares some of the same ideas with Ron, but you can obviously see that Rand isn't as principled as Ron, because like you said, he endorsed Romney. But I wouldn't look much into the endorsement. That is just Rand meandering with the GOP establishment, showing that he is a team player. I didn't like the endorsement myself but in the long run I think it will help the liberty movement more than you think. Ron Paul is exactly what the country needs right now, but since he chose to retire, and since the mainstream GOP would never allow Ron to become the Republican nominee for President, the next best thing is his son who shares a lot of Ron's values. And with Rand playing politics it puts him in a better position come 2016 to make a legitimate run for President because the GOP will support him more than his father. You can already see after that filibuster that he is gaining traction in mainstream media, something that Ron was not able to do despite his greatness.

Yeah, first of all, let me be clear, I'm not a Rand hater. I refuse to join the Republican Party because as a whole they are evil. I intend, based on what I see happening, to vote LP for the rest of my life or Constitution in years like '08 where the LP itself loses its principle. I will change my mind if someone like Rand becomes the GOP nominee. I want Rand in the White House.

That said, I still think its a gamble. Its one I'm willing to take, but it still is one. If Rand can play politics now, who's to say he won't sell out in the White House?

Its not just the Romney endorsement though. Rand has made quite clear that he doesn't support legalization of drugs. He's made very clear that he's not for a truly defensive role for our military. He wants to moderate the empire but he doesn't want to get rid of it. He backed down on the freedom of association (Not so much worried about that issue by himself as I am worried about the broader implications of Rand not being able to stand by his unpopular view.) Honestly, I don't think a real libertarian is even CAPABLE of a Romney endorsement. It would have made just as much sense as endorsing Obama... none... Real libertarians know that they both equally sucked. I've not heard one libertarian that actually cared especially much which one of the jokers won in 2012. Somewhat ironically considering my criticisms, I was hoping for Obama to win... because I wanted Rand in 2016.



Context, Rand seems to intuitively know when to address certain subjects. What is brilliant about Rand, is that he knows when to hold em and when to fold em...and that ability is his bullet proof vest. Had he said the same things in different context, he could have been dismissed and called crazy. Because he waited for the right opportunity and the right context, he was able to advance our ideas and our cause.

Yeah, true. The thing is with Ron I always know what I'm getting. I don't know exactly how much Rand would change in office. I know what Ron's goals are and how quickly he would pursue them. I'd absolutely give Rand a shot but I'm afraid that he might sell out in that high position. Of course, I'd give him the benefit of the doubt until proven wrong, but I think there's some doubt. Ron was willing to commit political suicide, so we always knew where he stood.

dinosaur
03-07-2013, 10:33 PM
Yeah, true. The thing is with Ron I always know what I'm getting. I don't know exactly how much Rand would change in office. I know what Ron's goals are and how quickly he would pursue them. I'd absolutely give Rand a shot but I'm afraid that he might sell out in that high position. Of course, I'd give him the benefit of the doubt until proven wrong, but I think there's some doubt. Ron was willing to commit political suicide, so we always knew where he stood.
Wah, wah, afraid...scared, wah.

Rand is actually very easy to read. When he talks, he translates all of Ron's ideas into language that is convincing to those who we most need to convince. And he has shown that he is very good at moving the ball forward.

Christian Liberty
03-07-2013, 10:37 PM
I will note that I said that I support Rand unless/until he proves me wrong. But he is most definitely not his father. Ron was he anti-politiican. That admittedly left him with few allies, but still...

dinosaur
03-07-2013, 10:40 PM
I will note that I said that I support Rand unless/until he proves me wrong. But he is most definitely not his father. Ron was he anti-politiican. That admittedly left him with few allies, but still...

I admired Ron's style as well so I do get what you are saying. Rand's style isn't better, but different and just as necessary.

supermario21
03-07-2013, 10:49 PM
http://bcove.me/ki2aofv1


Full video of the Rand interview. Good stuff.

Christian Liberty
03-07-2013, 10:55 PM
I'm honestly not a utilitarian so I don't have a ton of respect for the whole "We have to lie" argument. As I said, I'm still going to vote for him at least once (Assuming he does actually get to the ballot, as I said I'm not registering GOP, I refuse to associate with that party) but I'm really not crazy about it and I wish he had his fathers convictions. Then again, I'm also really cynical and I think to actually win Rand would have to compromise to the point where it isn't even worth it. I think to win in this country you have to lie the way guys like Romney, Santorum, Obama, exc. lie. You have to worship the state. Rand's moderatism is not going to win him anything here. If it actually works I'll definitely reconsider.

I'm also surprised Rand hasn't taken on the pot legalization issue. 50% of the country, IIRC, is in favor of legalization. And its one of the most blatantly obvious political issues, at least IMO, and relatively easy to persuade someone of. Even more important to me personally, however, is the foreign policy. Reagan's foreign policy might be an improvement, but I really want Washington's. That sure as heck ain't happening under Rand (I don't really buy the whole "Secret undercover agent" idea for Rand. Rand is different than his dad, and that is something that you've got to accept, at the very least in the areas where he says "I don't agree with my dad.")

dinosaur
03-07-2013, 11:09 PM
I'm honestly not a utilitarian so I don't have a ton of respect for the whole "We have to lie" argument. As I said, I'm still going to vote for him at least once (Assuming he does actually get to the ballot, as I said I'm not registering GOP, I refuse to associate with that party) but I'm really not crazy about it and I wish he had his fathers convictions. Then again, I'm also really cynical and I think to actually win Rand would have to compromise to the point where it isn't even worth it. I think to win in this country you have to lie the way guys like Romney, Santorum, Obama, exc. lie. You have to worship the state. Rand's moderatism is not going to win him anything here. If it actually works I'll definitely reconsider.

I'm also surprised Rand hasn't taken on the pot legalization issue. 50% of the country, IIRC, is in favor of legalization. And its one of the most blatantly obvious political issues, at least IMO, and relatively easy to persuade someone of. Even more important to me personally, however, is the foreign policy. Reagan's foreign policy might be an improvement, but I really want Washington's. That sure as heck ain't happening under Rand (I don't really buy the whole "Secret undercover agent" idea for Rand. Rand is different than his dad, and that is something that you've got to accept, at the very least in the areas where he says "I don't agree with my dad.")

I get annoyed when people imply that Rand is lying. Not sharing all of your thoughts, all the time, to a hostile media, is not lying. And who brought up the secret undercover thing? The secret has been out for some time now, and our enemies know exactly what they are dealing with in Rand. Their only problem is that Rand hasn't given them the ammunition to destroy himself with.

Jordan Liberty
03-08-2013, 12:06 AM
Yeah, first of all, let me be clear, I'm not a Rand hater. I refuse to join the Republican Party because as a whole they are evil. I intend, based on what I see happening, to vote LP for the rest of my life or Constitution in years like '08 where the LP itself loses its principle. I will change my mind if someone like Rand becomes the GOP nominee. I want Rand in the White House.

That said, I still think its a gamble. Its one I'm willing to take, but it still is one. If Rand can play politics now, who's to say he won't sell out in the White House?

Its not just the Romney endorsement though. Rand has made quite clear that he doesn't support legalization of drugs. He's made very clear that he's not for a truly defensive role for our military. He wants to moderate the empire but he doesn't want to get rid of it. He backed down on the freedom of association (Not so much worried about that issue by himself as I am worried about the broader implications of Rand not being able to stand by his unpopular view.) Honestly, I don't think a real libertarian is even CAPABLE of a Romney endorsement. It would have made just as much sense as endorsing Obama... none... Real libertarians know that they both equally sucked. I've not heard one libertarian that actually cared especially much which one of the jokers won in 2012. Somewhat ironically considering my criticisms, I was hoping for Obama to win... because I wanted Rand in 2016.




Yeah, true. The thing is with Ron I always know what I'm getting. I don't know exactly how much Rand would change in office. I know what Ron's goals are and how quickly he would pursue them. I'd absolutely give Rand a shot but I'm afraid that he might sell out in that high position. Of course, I'd give him the benefit of the doubt until proven wrong, but I think there's some doubt. Ron was willing to commit political suicide, so we always knew where he stood.

It seems we think the same way then because what you said is exactly how I feel (except I am a registered Republican, but that was just to vote for Ron. Ideally I would like political parties to cease to exist altogether, but that's not happening anytime soon.) I agree that Ron is the anti-policitican. That's exactly what drew us all to him in the first place, but that is also what ultimately led to him not gaining traction in the primary. I have some doubts about Rand too but he's our best bet for now. I'm hoping there's enough Ron in him that he wouldn't sellout in a hypothetical Presidency, but I really trust the guy. Hopefully that trust is worthwhile.

TokenLibertarianGuy
03-08-2013, 06:53 AM
Yeah, first of all, let me be clear, I'm not a Rand hater. I refuse to join the Republican Party because as a whole they are evil. I intend, based on what I see happening, to vote LP for the rest of my life or Constitution in years like '08 where the LP itself loses its principle. I will change my mind if someone like Rand becomes the GOP nominee. I want Rand in the White House.

Sitting on the sidelines isn't going to change the GOP. If you want someone like Rand to be nominated, you have to work for it.

CaptLouAlbano
03-08-2013, 07:19 AM
Yeah, first of all, let me be clear, I'm not a Rand hater. I refuse to join the Republican Party because as a whole they are evil.

The Republican Party is not a monolithic entity, but is comprised of its members, and most importantly its committee members. The same goes for the Democratic party. The GOP is a center right party (rather than a true conservative/libertarian party) because the people who have been active and involved in party business over the past few decades have been in large part center right people. That faction has the majority control at the present time, but their majority is shrinking and in many counties across the country libertarian conservatives are holding the majority. We even have control in several states.


I intend, based on what I see happening, to vote LP for the rest of my life or Constitution in years like '08 where the LP itself loses its principle.

Every single libertarian conservative that has been elected to Congress has come from the GOP. Every single libertarian conservative that has been elected to state legislatures since the mid 80's has come from the GOP (Andre Marrou was the last person to win a state house seat running solely on the LP ballot and that occurred in 1984). Vote for whomever you want, but if you expect to see real change in the government at the state and federal level that change will come through the GOP.


I will change my mind if someone like Rand becomes the GOP nominee. I want Rand in the White House.

Rand can become the GOP nominee, but it will take people like yourself becoming involved in their local areas with the GOP. The more people we have sitting on county committee seats, the more likely counties will endorse Rand in his bid for the nomination, and/or will be able to mobilize a veritable army of activists to canvass, phone bank and fund raise for the candidate.

Part of the reason that Ron Paul was unable to win a state is because the ground troops were not in place. Sure there were a ton of people willing to stand on street corners and wave signs, a ton of people doing "internet activism" and even a nice size group of people involved in traditional campaign activities. But what Ron had very little of were people working within the party who were leaders in their particular precinct supporting him. It is one thing for an average voter to support Ron and do some campaign work for him (and they did have an impact), but the endorsement of a precinct committee person carries so much more weight and has the ability to steer hundreds if not thousands of votes to a particular candidate.

So, in conclusion, forget about your bias towards the GOP. Get out there, get involved and be the catalyst for change in your own home town.