Rand Paul Is Growing On Me

[mport1]

I was initially pretty critical of Rand Paul, but it looks like looks like he may turn out to be better than I thought. He's not quite as principled as Ron, but he seems to be pushing for some relatively radical stuff. His vote on the laser pointer law and his $500 billion spending cut which he called "modest" are very good signs.

Hearing some interviews with him it seems like he will be a lot more radical now that he has actually won. You can tell that he really doesn't care at all if he is reelected so he won't be holding back much. He could be an ideal future Presidential candidate bringing together most Republicans, tea party members, libertarians, and some liberals and anarchists (like myself). He seems to be quite good at the political game and is a much better speaker than Ron Paul.

[ronaldo23]

I was initially pretty critical of Rand Paul, but it looks like looks like he may turn out to be better than I thought. He's not quite as principled as Ron, but he seems to be pushing for some relatively radical stuff. His vote on the laser pointer law and his $500 billion spending cut which he called "modest" are very good signs.

Hearing some interviews with him it seems like he will be a lot more radical now that he has actually won. You can tell that he really doesn't care at all if he is reelected so he won't be holding back much. He could be an ideal future Presidential candidate bringing together most Republicans, tea party members, libertarians, and some liberals and anarchists (like myself). He seems to be quite good at the political game and is a much better speaker than Ron Paul.

Actually he is just as principled as Ron Paul. The better phrase may be that he is not as 'outspoken' as Ron. He just expresses his views in a different way, with different words, to appeal to more neo-cons and independents. I can't think of a serious philosophical principled disagreement that they really have.

[CheezItsRule]

I can't think of a serious philosophical principled disagreement that they really have.

Guatanamo, Iran, Ground Zero Mosque

I love Ron Paul. But the Repubs think he is too dovish on foreign policy. This is not an insult to Ron, but to the incredible hawkish views that the Neo-Cons hold currently.

Rand can be president in 2016 as long as he holds that he has a strong but SENSIBLE foreign policy. He can unite all legs of the party.

[ronaldo23]

Those are just sound-bytes he said to win an election. His voting record (granted none of us will know all his votes for at least a year) is the ONLY THING we can use gauge his disagreements with Ron. If you look at Ron's old campaigns in the 80s, they were quite similar to Rand, and he wasn't nearly as outspoken as he is today. To say Rand isn't as principle isn't fair without pointing to a voting record; it's like saying Ron is a racist based on the 90s newsletters attributed to his name.

[BamaFanNKy]

Guatanamo, Iran, Ground Zero Mosque

Gitmo may be it.... the other two, were all political.

[sailingaway]

I like him too. At first I just supported him for Ron, but he is pretty terrific on his own.

[ctiger2]

He's not quite as principled as Ron, but he seems to be pushing for some relatively radical stuff.

I disagree. Rand is just as principled as Ron. The difference is that Rand delivers the same message in a more palatable way for mass consumption. Ron just hits you across the head with a 2X4 of truth.

[Brett85]

Even on Gitmo Rand simply said that it should stay open long enough to try the prisoners down there in military tribunals. He doesn't support holding people at Gitmo indefinitely without trying them. He also never said that the government should stop the ground zero mosque from being built, and he was just blowing smoke on the Iran issue so that O'Reilly wouldn't criticize him over it.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

He's growing on me too, but don't expect me to be quiet when he votes anti-liberty.

[sailingaway]

He's growing on me too, but don't expect me to be quiet when he votes anti-liberty.

IF he does, no one here will be quiet.

[Brett85]

He's growing on me too, but don't expect me to be quiet when he votes anti-liberty.

Well wouldn't even some of Ron's votes on border security be considered "anti liberty" to some of the hardcore libertarians? Ron Paul himself is a conservative leaning libertarian.

[nayjevin]

Ron Paul himself is a conservative leaning libertarian.

That's a pretty good quick description, but since 'conservative' and 'libertarian' are catch-alls, it comes down to issue by issue who he is as an individual.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Well wouldn't even some of Ron's votes on border security be considered "anti liberty" to some of the hardcore libertarians? Ron Paul himself is a conservative leaning libertarian.

I have always been loudly against his views on that, but again, I take the position that his true view is his 1988 self (open borders). I seem to be vindicated as he has never even bothered with immigration since being re-elected in the 90s. He attacks the true culprit -- the Welfare State.

[juvanya]

I was skeptical at first, but he seems to be doing well in votes and advocacy.

[Galileo Galilei]

I was initially pretty critical of Rand Paul, but it looks like looks like he may turn out to be better than I thought. He's not quite as principled as Ron, but he seems to be pushing for some relatively radical stuff. His vote on the laser pointer law and his $500 billion spending cut which he called "modest" are very good signs.

Hearing some interviews with him it seems like he will be a lot more radical now that he has actually won. You can tell that he really doesn't care at all if he is reelected so he won't be holding back much. He could be an ideal future Presidential candidate bringing together most Republicans, tea party members, libertarians, and some liberals and anarchists (like myself). He seems to be quite good at the political game and is a much better speaker than Ron Paul.

Rand is just as principled as Ron, but uses better strategy, and looks like a get bet to get re-elected if he keeps it up. Instead of being a clone, he is starting with the foundation built by Ron and is improving upon it.

[BlackTerrel]

Rand is good on the issues that matter. He understands the game and is more polished and a better public speaker than Ron (at least in short attention span 2011). That;s the main difference.

[Sola_Fide]

Shoulda never doubted!

[BrendenR]

Shoulda never doubted!

Skepticism is not a bad trait . I myself was. Now I'm thrilled.

[itshappening]

Rand is more nuanced and favors "baby steps" approach. He isn't going to propose things that aren't completely unachievable but get us closer to the ultimate goal

that's why he wont be "pure" enough for those who say no compromise, as a Senator who commands respect he has to try and "work" with colleagues to find a compromise but that doesn't mean we completely throw the baby out the bath water

[MaxPower]

Guatanamo, Iran, Ground Zero Mosque

They do disagree about Guantanamo Bay, although it is a fairly trivial distinction (they both want to end indefinite detention and whatnot, but Rand doesn't want to close the base itself until after the terrorists are tried, which he says can be done validly in military trials).

On Iran, Rand has used some more "hawkish" rhetoric, but I don't think there is any substantive difference in their effective positions. You may note that before he was running for office, Rand (rightly) pooh-poohed the "threat" of Iran, as well as categorically denouncing aggressive war and stating that the Iranians' dislike for America was a result of our foreign policy. It was when Grayson picked this up and started wielding it as a campaign attack tool that Rand- without actually saying anything that substantially shifted his position on what to do about them- said that Iran was a serious threat.

As for the Ground Zero Mosque, I think this is the silliest "conflict" of all- Rand said that the issue should not be decided by the federal government, and that the only laws that should apply to it are local ones. He did say he didn't think it should be built, but it had absolutely nothing to do with public policy. The two are not in political disagreement at all.

All-in-all, I am troubled by Rand's dishonesty in some matters during the campaign, but it seems evident now that he has not abandoned liberty either in domestic or foreign policy, and he does not seem to dffer with his father on any major issue, aside from marginally "watering down" Ron Paul's less mainstream positions.

[K Elaine]

What do anarchists have to do with political process? I don't think Ron Paul is even an anarchist.

[BamaFanNKy]

All-in-all, I am troubled by Rand's dishonesty in some matters during the campaign, but it seems evident now that he has not abandoned liberty either in domestic or foreign policy, and he does not seem to dffer with his father on any major issue, aside from marginally "watering down" Ron Paul's less mainstream positions.

Where has he been dishonest?

[Sola_Fide]

Where has he been dishonest?

Don't engage Bama...don't engage..

[Brett85]

Where has he been dishonest?

In all honesty he kind of flipped back and forth on the war on drugs during the campaign. That was the one thing he did during the campaign that I really took issue with.

[BamaFanNKy]

In all honesty he kind of flipped back and forth on the war on drugs during the campaign. That was the one thing he did during the campaign that I really took issue with.

Well, you are full of $#@! on that comment. He kept the same answer. He believed the power should be at the states.

[Brett85]

Well, you are full of $#@! on that comment. He kept the same answer. He believed the power should be at the states.

No I'm not, and I didn't intend to start an argument. You're an $#@! who can't make an argument without using personal attacks. I am a Rand Paul supporter, but that doesn't mean that I agree with everything he's ever said and every action he's taken. I'll call him out when he's wrong.

http://bluegrasspolitics.bloginky.co...f-endorsement/

"Clay County Sheriff Kevin Johnson said he was ready to endorse Paul after the tea party-backed candidate offered assurances that he won’t seek funding cuts for regional drug task forces and Operation UNITE, a federal initiative providing undercover narcotics investigations and addiction treatment."

[specsaregood]

http://bluegrasspolitics.bloginky.co...f-endorsement/

"Clay County Sheriff Kevin Johnson said he was ready to endorse Paul after the tea party-backed candidate offered assurances that he won’t seek funding cuts for regional drug task forces and Operation UNITE, a federal initiative providing undercover narcotics investigations and addiction treatment."

I'm not seeing the flipflopping. Can you point it out with actual quotes from Rand?

[Brett85]

I'm not seeing the flipflopping. Can you point it out with actual quotes from Rand?

It's possible that he could've been misquoted, but I never heard him really clarify his stance on it. He did say on a Fox News interview that he wasn't proposing any changes to our drug laws. I remember we had a different interpretation of what he meant in that interview. I don't mean to drag up old events from the campaign, but I'm just pointing out that Rand did have to water down some of his views in order to get elected. I'll just have to wait and see how he votes. So far I've been nothing but pleased with him as a Senator. When drug laws come up for a vote we'll see how he actually votes.

[BamaFanNKy]

It's possible that he could've been misquoted, but I never heard him really clarify his stance on it. He did say on a Fox News interview that he wasn't proposing any changes to our drug laws. I remember we had a different interpretation of what he meant in that interview. I don't mean to drag up old events from the campaign, but I'm just pointing out that Rand did have to water down some of his views in order to get elected. I'll just have to wait and see how he votes. So far I've been nothing but pleased with him as a Senator. When drug laws come up for a vote we'll see how he actually votes.

Wait to see how he votes? His budget proposal defunded the drug war in the most part. Seriously, I wasn't picking a fight but... your really trotting out the Clay County Drug Money welfare er.... sheriff quote. I've seen him in more places say it's a local issue. DO YOU NOT REMEMBER THE $#@! HE GOT?

Seriously, I am defensive since it was a constant fight with Liberals and the Moffett people to keep them from lying about things.

[Brett85]

Wait to see how he votes? His budget proposal defunded the drug war in the most part. Seriously, I wasn't picking a fight but... your really trotting out the Clay County Drug Money welfare er.... sheriff quote. I've seen him in more places say it's a local issue. DO YOU NOT REMEMBER THE $#@! HE GOT?

Seriously, I am defensive since it was a constant fight with Liberals and the Moffett people to keep them from lying about things.

Well I never intended to bash Rand, but I just remember during the campaign that it seemed like he had to water down his views on that issue. I know that he had to do that because of all of the scrutiny regarding his views on the drug issue, and he may have lost the election had he not done that. My point was simply that he didn't take a really strong stance on that during the campaign.

Do you know how much he cut the DEA by in his proposal? I don't remember seeing that when I was reading through it.