New respect for Rand's word-fu / poliy-jitsu

[jmdrake]

I got this from the thread "Rand Paul : I’m not particularly happy with being lectured to by the administration about the Constitution. (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?470603-Rand-Paul%92s-Epic-Rant-%91I%92m-Not-Particularly-Happy-With-Being-Lectured-to-by-the-Administratio&highlight=rand+administration+constitution)" At first glance I was like [i]Meh. Most neocons give lip service to the constitution, magically re-discovering it whenever a dem violates it, but having amnesia and/or saying "It's not a suicide pact" when their side violates it."

But then I actually watched the video. The hearing was not about Iran. It was about the AUMF[1] to extend the GWOT[2]. By leading in with "How dare you attack me for supposedly interfering with your peace negotiations Secretary Kerry", Rand opened up an opportunity to attack the war mongers on the left and the right and a time when (supposedly) 80% of Americans have gotten over their war weariness. The points that Rand made that Boko Haram wasn't covered under the original AUMF and we shouldn't blindly open ourselves up to war with some 30 countries connected to ISIS.

The best part about this is that he got neocons (neocon light?) like Mark Levin praising him for his slap at the administration. But also any on the left who might listen may they "Hey? Should we really give another blank check for endless war?" It's a win/win.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=dI7zVFIEwC8

[thoughtomator]

There's nobody on the left who questions the blank check authority for global war. Nobody. Of course that will change with the next non-Democrat President, but the past six years have established that the left is NOT the natural home of the anti-war movement.

[acptulsa]

There's nobody on the left who questions the blank check authority for global war. Nobody. Of course that will change with the next non-Democrat President, but the past six years have established that the left is NOT the natural home of the anti-war movement.

No offense, but you really work at limiting the circles you circulate in, don't you?

How can we get the progs to stop claiming there's no difference between minarchists and neocons if we can't see or can't admit that principled liberals, though misguided, are not only possible, but existential?

Why not visit this guy for a few minutes? You might kind of like him:

http://rall.com/

[thoughtomator]

principled liberals

I have a whole collection of them right outside the unicorn stables.

Seriously though, six years of Obama have made clear that the principled liberal is at most, half a percent of the left. Completely insignificant from a political point of view.

You pretty much proved my point, as your best example is a cartoonist. Show me an actual political leader on the left who demonstrates principles.

[RabbitMan]

There's nobody on the left who questions the blank check authority for global war. Nobody. Of course that will change with the next non-Democrat President, but the past six years have established that the left is NOT the natural home of the anti-war movement.

Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Jim McDermott(ish), Barney Frank(just retired) off the top of my head?

But seriously though? There are plenty of the left that are anti-war. My wife is one of them. Maybe not in a purist non-interventionist fashion, as they may also be for humanitarian intervention when it seems extremely needed, but on the whole they are against needless war.

I would posit that the non-politician Democrats you speak of are Pro-Obama interventions as a reaction to the ridiculous anti-everything movement that Republicans pushed after 2009. People who legitimately want to improve society get sick seeing half of the political body say "No! Never! Tyrant! Hyperbole!" to every single move the President took. Especially when they were things that previous Presidents performed without a hiccup from the GOP. If anything, it reinforced their party bias more than ever and, when I spoke with people, was a constant stumbling block toward attracting them to the liberty movement.

Don't be a party-ist.

Beyond that, I agree with the OP that Rand is a ninja. Lol

[twomp]

I have a whole collection of them right outside the unicorn stables.

Seriously though, six years of Obama have made clear that the principled liberal is at most, half a percent of the left. Completely insignificant from a political point of view.

You pretty much proved my point, as your best example is a cartoonist. Show me an actual political leader on the left who demonstrates principles.

Jim Webb


He ran for the Senate in 2006 and beat the Virginia Democratic party’s preferred candidate on a platform of opposition to foreign interventionism, and rejection of Wall Street in favor of Main Street, winning the general election. Six years later, he declined to run for another term.

http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2015/01/04/jim-webb-the-alternative/

Probably don't hear much about him because the media gives him the "Ron Paul" treatment.

[jllundqu]

Bump +rep

Excellent post

[Chieppa1]

Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Jim McDermott(ish), Barney Frank(just retired) off the top of my head?

But seriously though? There are plenty of the left that are anti-war. My wife is one of them. Maybe not in a purist non-interventionist fashion, as they may also be for humanitarian intervention when it seems extremely needed, but on the whole they are against needless war.

I would posit that the non-politician Democrats you speak of are Pro-Obama interventions as a reaction to the ridiculous anti-everything movement that Republicans pushed after 2009. People who legitimately want to improve society get sick seeing half of the political body say "No! Never! Tyrant! Hyperbole!" to every single move the President took. Especially when they were things that previous Presidents performed without a hiccup from the GOP. If anything, it reinforced their party bias more than ever and, when I spoke with people, was a constant stumbling block toward attracting them to the liberty movement.

Don't be a party-ist.

Beyond that, I agree with the OP that Rand is a ninja. Lol

Elizabeth Warren pretty much backed Israel's raid on Gaza over the summer. The article below is from the actual anti-war left, Glenn Greenwald & Jeremy Scahill.
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/08/28/elizabeth-warren-speaks-israelgaza-sounds-like-netanyahu/

And Samantha Powers got to where she is today pushing for "humanitarian intervention" to prevent "genocide" in her words. Like Libya you know? So their "good intentions" are just as f'ed as the outright warmongering of the right.

Anti-war is different from anti-war light.

[RabbitMan]

Elizabeth Warren pretty much backed Israel's raid on Gaza over the summer. The article below is from the actual anti-war left, Glenn Greenwald & Jeremy Scahill.
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/08/28/elizabeth-warren-speaks-israelgaza-sounds-like-netanyahu/

And Samantha Powers got to where she is today pushing for "humanitarian intervention" to prevent "genocide" in her words. Like Libya you know? So their "good intentions" are just as f'ed as the outright warmongering of the right.

Anti-war is different from anti-war light.

Warren was vocally against arming Syrian Rebels AND intervening in Syria. So. I think that matters a bit more.

Besides this was in regards to questioning the blank authority for going to war.

[presence]

bump

[jmdrake]

Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Jim McDermott(ish), Barney Frank(just retired) off the top of my head?

Barney Frank? Mr. "My roommate runs a pedophile prostitution ring and I helped set up the housing bubble" Barney Frank? Not on my list. I'd say Dennis Kucinich and Cynthia McKinney. Both got destroyed by their own party.

[acptulsa]

Best I know of in Washington is Ron Wyden up in Oregon.

[hillertexas]

bump

[Matt Collins]

Yes, Rand is playing chess, everyone else is playing checkers.

[jonhowe]

I have a whole collection of them right outside the unicorn stables.

Seriously though, six years of Obama have made clear that the principled liberal is at most, half a percent of the left. Completely insignificant from a political point of view.

You pretty much proved my point, as your best example is a cartoonist. Show me an actual political leader on the left who demonstrates principles.

Almost 20% of registered dems disapprove of Obama. And most true "principled liberals" are in the smaller parties (Green, for example, is where my brother and sister are registered. They love Ron Paul, except for "the whole no regulations thing"). I suspect their disapproval of obama is quite high.

I'd say most liberals want "the best", but just haven't learned to think critically about how that works.

[jmdrake]

Almost 20% of registered dems disapprove of Obama. And most true "principled liberals" are in the smaller parties (Green, for example, is where my brother and sister are registered. They love Ron Paul, except for "the whole no regulations thing"). I suspect their disapproval of obama is quite high.

I'd say most liberals want "the best", but just haven't learned to think critically about how that works.

Yes! ^This! I was talking with one gay friend about my libertarian "Get the government out of marriage" viewpoint and this friend responded with "I'm not going to get you to drop this libertarian thing am I?" to which I responded "You do know that without it I would be against same sex marriage right?" To which this friend promptly dropped the topic. And that's the beauty of what Rand is doing with his outreach to minorities. He's proposing real solutions to real problems! Obama blathers on about how bad Citizen's United is and that we need "mandatory voting" when Rand has already proposed a way to give the vote back to 1/3rd of African Americans who lost their votes for non violent felony convictions! Boss move!

[acptulsa]

And that's the beauty of what Rand is doing with his outreach to minorities. He's proposing real solutions to real problems!

Absolutely.

The cognitive dissonance that usually crops up at this point is the old, 'Well keeping our hands off couldn't possibly work or we wouldn't have this problem'. So the best thing we can arm ourselves with to handle this is a good understanding of the problem > reaction > solution-worse-than-the-problem thing and some fine examples of it.

Like the higher rates Medicare created which progressively led to fewer and fewer people being able to afford higher and higher health care prices. Like the bankers and other robber barons manipulating gold, which led to people thinking an elastic currency might be an improvement, which led to a hundred years of inflation and the evaporation of the middle class. Like...

We could do Rand more favors if we fill this thread with this sort of example.