I'm a Liberal Democrat. I'm Voting for Rand Paul in 2016. Here is why.

[NACBA]

The editor of Breitbart Unmasked, a site that I enjoy immensely and find informative, recently told me that supporting Rand Paul disqualifies a person from being labeled a progressive. My rebuttal was that he might be right. However, I also mentioned that Democratic Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia agreed with my latest Congress Blog piece. In the article, I explain why Rand Paul is correct in questioning the legality of President Obama's troop deployments. Sadly, people at UC Berkeley are more interested in protesting Bill Maher than condemning a conflict George McGovern stated weakens our country in the same manner as Vietnam. Hundreds of airstrikes, over 3,000 soldiers deployed, and a request for $5.6 billion is a war, folks.

Had President Mitt Romney just doubled our military presence in the Middle East and launched airstrikes that even the Kurds and the Free Syrian Army have criticized, the reaction would have been entirely different from liberals throughout the country. We once again have over 3,000 American boots on the ground in Iraq (without a peep from the anti-war left), only months after a VA crisis that caused veterans to die as they waited for healthcare, and about the same time as the publication of this book by an American general. To make matters worse, Congress is too cowardly to even debate the issue, despite calls for a discussion by Rand Paul. In the meantime, our values as a nation have succumb to fear mongering and paranoia.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/h-a-goodman/im-a-liberal-democrat-im_b_6169542.html

[jmdrake]

Wow! Great read!

[NACBA]

Wow! Great read!

John--where are you practicing now? Nashville?

[jmdrake]

John--where are you practicing now? Nashville?

Yes.

[Inkblots]

It says something about the intelligence and awareness of those who frequent Huff Post comment sections that so many of them think that Ron and Rand Paul are the same person...

[FriedChicken]

With 25 likes:

Rand Paul wants to take Civil Rights back 100 years. Return to the Jim Crowe Days. The person that wrote this isnt a Liberal Democrat, he his an uninformed imposter.

With 25 likes:

Any credibility Paul had with me ran out the door along with his own behind when he ditched his table mates to avoid having to speak to a young DREAMer immigrant. I want to vote for a leader who doesn't shy away from the reality of the issues. It's easy to say one thing on paper, and a whole different ball game to look real people in the face and discuss how policies affect them every day.

With 10 likes:

The writer would support a person [Rand Paul] who admitted that if he were in the US Senate in the 1960s, he would have voted against the landmark Civil Rights bills because his sympathies would have been with small business owners like Lester Maddox who refused to serve non-whites in his coffee shop. This is the type of outlook which will bring liberals and conservatives together?

In the lol category:

With 5 likes:

Yes, Ron Paul is smarter than the other Republicans,However, fiscally, his economic policies , helped to created the last recession.
The lack of government insight, accountability, and transparacy created the worse economic slow down. in history. So Why would you want to go back to the failed policies, of reagonomics,

With 4 likes:

WHAT HAS RON PAUL DONE FOR TAXPAYERS FOR THE LAST 40+ YEARS WHILE COLLECTING A TAXPAYER PAYCHECK?...AND WHAT HAS RAND DONE FOR THE LAST 10+ YEARS WHILE COLLECTING A TAXPAYER PAYCHECK?...check the box that says "NOTHING"

with 18 likes:

If a liberal is trying to puff up Ron Paul for the Republican nomination that is all you need to know in order to convince you to not vote for him. Remember McCain in 2008, every liberal's favorite "fair minded" conservative. Don't fall for the trap, they just told us who they want to run against. Sorry, Ron....they just crushed your chances of EVER getting the GOP nomination.

Comments on Huff post are pretty special.

[orenbus]

Awesome article, this is why in a general he'll win. The only question is will he be able to secure the nomination when all the other candidates will be focused on attacking him, and at the same time cutting through the media's 24 hour pressure on influencing public opinion to disqualify him as a reasonable candidate.

[Inkblots]

Awesome article, this is why in a general he'll win. The only question is will he be able to secure the nomination when all the other candidates will be focused on attacking him, and at the same time cutting through the media's 24 hour pressure on influencing public opinion to disqualify him as a reasonable candidate.

It's going to be one hell of a ride, that's for sure.

[Vanguard101]

Meh. I guess

[RonPaulMall]

The majority of hard core liberals today are authoritarian in the extreme. Rand Paul's commitment to Civil Rights and Civil Liberties actually makes him more of a threat than somebody like Christie or Jeb because Rand is hostile towards the police state necessary to make liberal policy a reality.. So don't expect much support from the left. If he gets the nomination, you will see a slander campaign like nothing we have ever seen in the history of American politics.

[erowe1]

What is progressivism? Is peace really part of it? It sure didn't use to be.

Not a rhetorical question.

[orenbus]

What is progressivism? Is peace really part of it? It sure didn't use to be.

Not a rhetorical question.

Not saying all, but many in the anti-war movement leading up to the Iraq war probably classified themselves progressives, at least the ones that I saw in New York City during the 2003 marches.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/February_15,_2003_anti-war_protest#New_York


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ysva-csAg8A

[Bastiat's The Law]

What is progressivism? Is peace really part of it? It sure didn't use to be.

Not a rhetorical question.

Progressivism had its genesis in the Spanish American war. It's repackaged quasi-imperialism wrapped in a bow.

[Feeding the Abscess]

The time to oppose actions in Iraq was in June, when the chips started falling in a meaningful manner.

Instead of opposing US action in Iraq, Rand was actually defending Obama for sending troops, and gave moral cover for the action by saying it was in defense of an embassy and consulate.

Sorry, Rand doesn't get credit for opposing Obama's actions in Iraq. Not from people who understand that supporting a small incursion leads to a larger one in very short time.

[Grenadine]

This article was interesting, mainly because of two points:1) How anti-Hillary it is, especially on foreign policy and corporatism which Rand should keep exploiting2) How it builds on something that Rand brings up often: that he can work with anyone on issues they agree on