Rand has proven that he is his father's son

[Petar]

Something tells me that those individuals who are continuously trying to discredit Rand Paul are going to have a much harder time after this...

[WarAnonymous]

Agreed. It's been a slow start because he had to work in there but finally it's almost as if he couldn't take it anymore. He said a lot of things I didn't think I would hear him say, especially not this early. I do have to say that I am very impressed with Rand. I have more differences with him than his father but you won't see any bashing from me at this point.

[Petar]

Agreed. It's been a slow start because he had to work in there but finally it's almost as if he couldn't take it anymore. He said a lot of things I didn't think I would hear him say, especially not this early. I do have to say that I am very impressed with Rand. I have more differences with him than his father but you won't see any bashing from me at this point.

Cool. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that a lot of people are going to find themselves biting their tongues for a while...

[Chester Copperpot]

Rand just has a different method than Ron.... Rand acts probably moreso the way Ben Franklin would... Realize that all things are political and that to win people to your side you cant just always point the finger and say "youre wrong".... You have to give a little to get a little.

Of course I like Ron's way.. ."youre wrong mother $#@!er"..... but 1 vote doesnt win the house.


Rand had 10% of the senate with him... Think about that.

[jmdrake]

Something tells me that those individuals who are continuously trying to discredit Rand Paul are going to have a much harder time after this...

True. But it's bigger than that. While there may have been some just wanting to "discredit" Rand, others were genuinely concerned because it's sometimes hard to tell the "teocon act" from the real deal. Rand's willingness to take flack for teocon allies by ultimately voting to confirm Hagel was a signal, whether on purpose or by accident, that he's really with us. This move has gained praise from all quarters. And that's important. Rand can't win just off of "likely republican voters" as the conservative base will be split between (at least) he and Marco Rubio. (Yeah, we can say all day that Rubio isn't really a conservative, but that's not the picture the media is painting of him.) Rand will need a coalition, but one built on principle instead of compromise. Ron was doing that, but he didn't bash democrats enough and sound "patriotic" enough (even though he was) to win over rank and file "get your information from Fox news" republicans. Bottom line? Rand doesn't need to silence his critics. He needs to win them over. That's because for every Ron supporter that has criticized Rand, there are probably 10 people who liked Ron but didn't become a full fledged supporter that think the same way. The good news is, Rand showed yesterday he can win such people over.

[Petar]

True. But it's bigger than that. While there may have been some just wanting to "discredit" Rand, others were genuinely concerned because it's sometimes hard to tell the "teocon act" from the real deal. Rand's willingness to take flack for teocon allies by ultimately voting to confirm Hagel was a signal, whether on purpose or by accident, that he's really with us. This move has gained praise from all quarters. And that's important. Rand can't win just off of "likely republican voters" as the conservative base will be split between (at least) he and Marco Rubio. (Yeah, we can say all day that Rubio isn't really a conservative, but that's not the picture the media is painting of him.) Rand will need a coalition, but one built on principle instead of compromise. Ron was doing that, but he didn't bash democrats enough and sound "patriotic" enough (even though he was) to win over rank and file "get your information from Fox news" republicans. Bottom line? Rand doesn't need to silence his critics. He needs to win them over. That's because for every Ron supporter that has criticized Rand, there are probably 10 people who liked Ron but didn't become a full fledged supporter that think the same way. The good news is, Rand showed yesterday he can win such people over.

I don't know, I just think that there are some insane puritans who just never want to see anything good in Rand no matter what, and I am glad that hopefully they are just going to have to shut up for a while. What can I say.

[jmdrake]

I don't know, I just think that there are some insane puritans who just never want to see anything good in Rand no matter what, and I am glad that hopefully they are just going to have to shut up for a while. What can I say.

If that's the way you see it, that's the way you see it. However I caution you against selection bias. Not to long ago, when some were attacking Justin Raimondo and AntiWar.com for "never saying anything good about Rand", I did a quick Google search of their site and proved that wasn't true. Six months from now, will you remember the praise some of Rand's critics have given him today if the occasion arises to criticize him again? And consider the title of your thread. Nothing wrong with it of course. But Rand has made a concerted effort to show certain people that he's not just like his father. He's as much as said that. If during this process he had not received criticism from at least some of his father's supporters, he would not have been accomplishing what he was trying to do. That's the truth. It's a painful truth, but it's still the truth.

Lastly, I wouldn't want to be a part of a moment where people didn't feel empowered to criticize the "leaders." That's what Obamabots do and Bushbots did. I remember all of the conversations I had with Obama supporters in 2007/2008 where I pointed out that he never actually promised to end the Iraq war and he promised to escalate the war in Afghanistan and take it to other countries. They said "Oh he's just saying that to get elected." Now some realize they've been had. Some believe "Obama's a good person, he's just being forced to do this." Some say "Well Obama's bad but so was Bush." And some just embrace whatever Obama does. If everyone in the movement gives Rand a pass on everything, where does that stop? Do we extend that courtesy to everyone that dons the "liberty" mantle? Do we lose credibility the next time we criticize a Marco Rubio or a Paul Ryan for doing or saying something we don't like? Winning 2016 does not revolve around convincing each other to walk in lock step. It depends on reaching beyond our own confines. Hoping that some who think differently than you will just "shut up for a while" might make you feel better, but it doesn't move the ball forward. I trust advice from people who are willing to criticize others they support rather than those who simply "fall in line" and say what they think. Call that "insane puritanism" if you will. But the world needs some "insane puritans."

[Origanalist]

I have criticised Rand in the past, but not to any extreme. Yesterday was great, and it was fun watching the posers trying to worm their way into the limelight. (Rubio was pathetic)

[cbc58]

Would anyone else have done what Rand did yesterday? As much as we dislike it - there is no perfect politician - that even goes for his father. Rand has my respect and he went along way in getting his name out there to those who didn't know who he is (and they are the majority)

Maybe we should find a billionaire or two, get them to buy 5000 acres somewhere, and move the US govt. out of Washington. Wonder if the states can vote to do that. The culture of DC is as much a problem as is Congress itself.

[EBounding]

If yesterday didn't convince libertarians that Rand's the real deal, then nothing will, and there's no point arguing anymore.

[otherone]

If yesterday didn't convince libertarians that Rand's the real deal, then nothing will, and there's no point arguing anymore.

This is and never has been a cult of personality. An elected official is only as good as his next vote. Once Rand has demonstrated a consistent body of work I will pay him the same respect I have for his father. I'm very pleased by his filibuster but don't believe it affords him any "pass" on future deviations from the Liberty Movement.

[CaptUSA]

13 hours of awesomeness yesterday. On so many levels.

Regardless of any disagreements you may have with him, Rand is demonstrating widespread appeal and directing the conversation in favor of liberty.

There are many roads that lead a person towards the liberty movement. Rand is showing where those roads can converge. It is breathtaking to witness.

[Cap]

Last night was epic for the Liberty movement with more than a few people shaken awake. The ball is in our court now, it is up to us to shape the debate and keep pounding the message of true Liberty. We have to be vigilant in guarding against establishment infiltration and be very vocal when the message strays. Remember, we are the narrative. Don't let the message stray and be hijacked.

The establishment was caught off guard last night, they will try to bastardize our message and re-define it. You know it's coming, be prepared.

[cbc58]

Please, please, please do not define this as a win for the liberty movement - define it as a win for the American people. If anything is going to change it needs broad-based support across the electorate. There are people in all parties that embrace this message, not just those in the liberty movement. And most people will equate this to following the constitution and reigning in a president and a govt. that has overstepped authority - not the pursuit of liberty.

[Cap]

I agree in the respect that I hate labels. Labels feed the left-right paradigm. My piont, it is up to us to keep the message on track.

[cajuncocoa]

If that's the way you see it, that's the way you see it. However I caution you against selection bias. Not to long ago, when some were attacking Justin Raimondo and AntiWar.com for "never saying anything good about Rand", I did a quick Google search of their site and proved that wasn't true. Six months from now, will you remember the praise some of Rand's critics have given him today if the occasion arises to criticize him again? And consider the title of your thread. Nothing wrong with it of course. But Rand has made a concerted effort to show certain people that he's not just like his father. He's as much as said that. If during this process he had not received criticism from at least some of his father's supporters, he would not have been accomplishing what he was trying to do. That's the truth. It's a painful truth, but it's still the truth.

Lastly, I wouldn't want to be a part of a moment where people didn't feel empowered to criticize the "leaders." That's what Obamabots do and Bushbots did. I remember all of the conversations I had with Obama supporters in 2007/2008 where I pointed out that he never actually promised to end the Iraq war and he promised to escalate the war in Afghanistan and take it to other countries. They said "Oh he's just saying that to get elected." Now some realize they've been had. Some believe "Obama's a good person, he's just being forced to do this." Some say "Well Obama's bad but so was Bush." And some just embrace whatever Obama does. If everyone in the movement gives Rand a pass on everything, where does that stop? Do we extend that courtesy to everyone that dons the "liberty" mantle? Do we lose credibility the next time we criticize a Marco Rubio or a Paul Ryan for doing or saying something we don't like? Winning 2016 does not revolve around convincing each other to walk in lock step. It depends on reaching beyond our own confines. Hoping that some who think differently than you will just "shut up for a while" might make you feel better, but it doesn't move the ball forward. I trust advice from people who are willing to criticize others they support rather than those who simply "fall in line" and say what they think. Call that "insane puritanism" if you will. But the world needs some "insane puritans."

Couldn't have said it better... +rep

[A Son of Liberty]

If that's the way you see it, that's the way you see it. However I caution you against selection bias. Not to long ago, when some were attacking Justin Raimondo and AntiWar.com for "never saying anything good about Rand", I did a quick Google search of their site and proved that wasn't true. Six months from now, will you remember the praise some of Rand's critics have given him today if the occasion arises to criticize him again? And consider the title of your thread. Nothing wrong with it of course. But Rand has made a concerted effort to show certain people that he's not just like his father. He's as much as said that. If during this process he had not received criticism from at least some of his father's supporters, he would not have been accomplishing what he was trying to do. That's the truth. It's a painful truth, but it's still the truth.

Lastly, I wouldn't want to be a part of a moment where people didn't feel empowered to criticize the "leaders." That's what Obamabots do and Bushbots did. I remember all of the conversations I had with Obama supporters in 2007/2008 where I pointed out that he never actually promised to end the Iraq war and he promised to escalate the war in Afghanistan and take it to other countries. They said "Oh he's just saying that to get elected." Now some realize they've been had. Some believe "Obama's a good person, he's just being forced to do this." Some say "Well Obama's bad but so was Bush." And some just embrace whatever Obama does. If everyone in the movement gives Rand a pass on everything, where does that stop? Do we extend that courtesy to everyone that dons the "liberty" mantle? Do we lose credibility the next time we criticize a Marco Rubio or a Paul Ryan for doing or saying something we don't like? Winning 2016 does not revolve around convincing each other to walk in lock step. It depends on reaching beyond our own confines. Hoping that some who think differently than you will just "shut up for a while" might make you feel better, but it doesn't move the ball forward. I trust advice from people who are willing to criticize others they support rather than those who simply "fall in line" and say what they think. Call that "insane puritanism" if you will. But the world needs some "insane puritans."

+rep

I posted Raimondo's tweet #StandWithRand in the Filibuster thread.

For me, it's always been about principle. It's never been about "trying to discredit".

[cajuncocoa]

I've criticized Rand pretty harshly on this board...yet, I've always said that I would be among those to give props to him when he does something of which I approve.

I more than approve of what he did yesterday; I applaud him for standing up for what is right. That doesn't mean I won't criticize him in the future if/when he sounds more right-wing than libertarian on some issue (e.g., foreign policy) but let's just take things one step at a time.

[AuH20]

I've criticized Rand pretty harshly on this board...yet, I've always said that I would be among those to give props to him when he does something of which I approve.

I more than approve of what he did yesterday; I applaud him for standing up for what is right. That doesn't mean I won't criticize him in the future if/when he sounds more right-wing than libertarian on some issue (e.g., foreign policy) but let's just take things one step at a time.

Criticism is welcome, but I have no patience for those who question his integrity.

[Romulus]

Rand did a great job... I hate the games he was to play to get on Hannity and further himself by endorsing Romney, but he is just schooling the system. We don't need to freak out when he has to do that, just try and understand why he has to do that.

[VBRonPaulFan]

13 hours of awesomeness yesterday. On so many levels.

Regardless of any disagreements you may have with him, Rand is demonstrating widespread appeal and directing the conversation in favor of liberty.

There are many roads that lead a person towards the liberty movement. Rand is showing where those roads can converge. It is breathtaking to witness.

+1, Rubio can't give a short SOTU rebuttal without screwing it up and making it akward for everyone, but Rand can filibuster the Senate rather eloquently for ~12 hours. I think a lot of conservatives are going to give him a hard second look. This has definitely helped his chances if he decided to run in 2016 for POTUS.

[ZENemy]

I still have ZERO faith in the "Throne" but Rand said all the right things last night, I don't think it will change a thing but its nice to see someone finally do ANYTHING!

[NorfolkPCSolutions]

Something tells me that those individuals who are continuously trying to discredit Rand Paul are going to have a much harder time after this...

You know, I felt compelled to post immediately after reading your statement. I'm one of those folks who have been on the fence about Rand. It may be that I'm just not spending as much time "getting in the know," or if I've become politically jaded, but I'm certainly not a man who has tried to discredit the younger Paul. That aside, I am going to have a much harder time talking myself out of supporting the man "after this..."

Rand moved the ball so far forward last night, really, he did. I recognize that the man has a better head for politics than I, and I understand that he is often playing chess when my mind is playing checkers. He tends to know when to hold 'em and when to fold 'em, and I don't - which is why I don't gamble. I'm one of those Kill It With Fire type of folks. I hate the whole goddamn game, really, I do.

When the time comes, that is, if Rand manages the impossible and makes it past the bastards in the GOP machine and garners the nomination for 2016, he already had my vote in 2016 by default. Until now, however, I didn't know if I would be willing to support the man, in the sense of knocking on doors, passing out flyers, or phone banking - the physical act of going out there with the intention to help the man.

To close up, last night gave me pause. I'm the most cynical motherfucker you will ever know, and most of the time, that's alright. It's not alright anymore. Rand Paul deserves not only my respect - he already had that - but also my support, the support of "those damned Ron Paul people," and these very forums.

Count me the $#@! in.

[Seraphim]

Agreed. Rand is AWESOME.

Let's not allow imperfection stop greatness from functioning. He's human and therefore imperfect. Great will have to suffice.

If yesterday didn't convince libertarians that Rand's the real deal, then nothing will, and there's no point arguing anymore.

[NorfolkPCSolutions]

Okay, now I've read the thread, and have something else to add.

jmdrake, I'd like to offer a summary of your above post...Rand Paul has the ability to bring folks like myself (the KIWF types,) the politically burned-out, the rank-and-file GOP voters (I'm pointing to folks like my parents), and the libertarian wing of the GOP, as well as the liberty movement itself, together.

That's what I took from your post. And that's what's put this stupid smile on my face as I think about Rand Paul.

[Aratus]

i've been somewhat away from the RPFs briefly for the past few days & to my surprise and
delight, i see that my local news up in Boston had a few brief updates on his filibuster and
then last night's national news gave him quite a significant bit of airtime. he's becoming the
voice of the principled conservative opposition to the policies of the obama administration...

[FSP-Rebel]

[Petar]

i've been somewhat away from the RPFs briefly for the past few days & to my surprise and
delight, i see that my local news up in Boston had a few brief updates on his filibuster and
then last night's national news gave him quite a significant bit of airtime. he's becoming the
voice of the principled conservative opposition to the policies of the obama administration...

Definitely a major milestone for the modern liberty movement...

[jay_dub]

My takeaway from the filibuster is that it really laid open the schism between the Old Guard and New Wave Republicans.

Rand chose his battle well. I'm not sure if his target was Obama or the Old Guard, judging from the fallout.

Things may get VERY interesting between now and the 2014 elections.

[economics102]

Anyone who can't see that Rand is fighting our fight is just silly.

Ask the question: who is carrying the heaviest load today for the liberty movement? It's not Ron Paul anymore, it's Rand. He is walking a mind-boggling tightrope walk and making it look easy. The fact that we're even here is so improbable. Can you imagine the pressure he's under, trying to use a chess-like strategy to advance the cause of liberty while knowing the world's biggest bullseye is on his back, with establishment Democrats and Republicans, as well as the brainwashed liberals, just waiting for the opportunity to throw him under the bus?

I also think one of Rand's saving graces is probably his likeability. Like his father, I think Rand has ingratiated himself to the power brokers in Washington and they're a little more reluctant to throw him under the bus if they don't have to.