Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 65

Thread: Rand Paul just trolled the hell out of Cruz and Rubio on the defense budget

  1. #1

    Rand Paul just trolled the hell out of Cruz and Rubio on the defense budget

    Rand Paul just trolled the hell out of Cruz and Rubio on the defense budget

    Kevin Boyd, Rare Contributor
    Posted on March 26, 2015 5:03 pm

    Many were shocked at news Thursday that Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) had proposed a senate amendment that would increase defense spending. Paul, who has long advocated for a smaller defense budget, proposed increasing defense spending to $696 billion via his amendment.

    Earlier, fellow likely presidential candidate Senator Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), along with Senator Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), filed an amendment to increase defense spending to exactly that number.

    There are differences between Paul’s and Rubio’s amendments. The biggest difference is that Rand Paul cut more than enough spending from domestic programs to pay for his defense increase. Rubio and Cotton simply boosted defense spending without offsetting those increases with cuts, this increasing the deficit and debt.

    Paul took fire from his libertarian base, particularly Reason Magazine’s Nick Gillespie, who called him “less interesting.” Left-wing publication Salon called him a flip-flopper.

    Rare asked Paul’s senior adviser, Doug Stafford, what Paul is trying to do with the amendment. Here’s how Stafford replied:

    ...
    read more:
    http://rare.us/story/rand-paul-just-...efense-budget/



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    Very clever of Rand.
    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    It's a balance between appeasing his supporters, appeasing the deep state and reaching his own goals.
    ~Resident Badgiraffe




  4. #3
    “America does not project power from bankruptcy court,” Paul said.

    The Republicans who rejected Paul’s amendment chose to add to the deficit and debt instead of paying for new spending. According to Stafford, that was the entire point of Paul’s amendment.

    Read more at http://rare.us/story/rand-paul-just-...fRLJfHrXxKu.99
    Well played Rand, well played. With one masterful written bill, you exposed the republicans as big government, fiscally reckless people trying to bankrupt the nation. With this explanation, all is forgiven

  5. #4
    They got Rand rolled.
    "I am commonly opposed to those who modestly assume the rank of champions of liberty, and make a very patriotic noise about the people. It is the stale artifice which has duped the world a thousand times, and yet, though detected, it is still successful."

    --Fisher Ames (1789)

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Henry View Post
    They got Rand rolled.
    Only part 1 on this issue. Part 2 is when he smashes them in the debates over this.
    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    It's a balance between appeasing his supporters, appeasing the deep state and reaching his own goals.
    ~Resident Badgiraffe




  7. #6
    “America does not project power from bankruptcy court,” Paul said.
    Oh, my. My, oh, my.

  8. #7
    From the looks of things, he trolled the hell out of a bunch pf people here, too.

  9. #8
    I think a lot of people are quick to jump on the knee jerk reaction train until they see some post about how brilliant the "play" was.

    Time to stop reading into the crazy headlines and start reading actual information and reading in-between the lines. Rand intends to run for president and he intends to give it his best shot at winning. It is safe to assume everything he does from here on out (if not the last year) is calculated for winning the nomination and the general.
    THE SQUAD of RPF
    1. enhanced_deficit - Paid Troll / John Bolton book promoter
    2. Devil21 - LARPing Wizard, fake magical script reader
    3. Firestarter - Tax Troll; anti-tax = "criminal behavior"
    4. TheCount - Comet Pizza Pedo Denier <-- sick

    @Ehanced_Deficit's real agenda on RPF =troll:

    Who spends this much time copy/pasting the same recycled links, photos/talking points.

    7 yrs/25k posts later RPF'ers still respond to this troll



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by CPUd View Post
    From the looks of things, he trolled the hell out of a bunch pf people here, too.
    Some of the smarter people have faith in Ron's son.
    Rand Paul for Peace

  12. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Henry View Post
    They got Rand rolled.

    Hopefully we'll see plenty of them.

    Paul forced Senators Rubio and Cruz to choose between fiscal conservatism and increasing defense spending. In rejecting Paul’s amendment, both Cruz and Rubio prioritized increasing Pentagon spending above fiscal responsibility.

    Now to make commercials about this.
    The wisdom of Swordy:

    On bringing the troops home
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    They are coming home, all the naysayers said they would never leave Syria and then they said they were going to stay in Iraq forever.

    It won't take very long to get them home but it won't be overnight either but Iraq says they can't stay and they are coming home just like Trump said.

    On fighting corruption:
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Trump had to donate the "right way" and hang out with the "right people" in order to do business in NYC and Hollyweird and in order to investigate and expose them.
    Fascism Defined

  13. #11
    Rand is playing chess, not checkers.
    __________________________________________________ ________________
    "A politician will do almost anything to keep their job, even become a patriot" - Hearst

  14. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by eleganz View Post
    I think a lot of people are quick to jump on the knee jerk reaction train until they see some post about how brilliant the "play" was.

    Time to stop reading into the crazy headlines and start reading actual information and reading in-between the lines. Rand intends to run for president and he intends to give it his best shot at winning. It is safe to assume everything he does from here on out (if not the last year) is calculated for winning the nomination and the general.
    Quote Originally Posted by CPUd View Post
    From the looks of things, he trolled the hell out of a bunch pf people here, too.
    Yes that is very disappointing too. Since when did we start trusting the MSM headlines?

    Everyone went into a conniption when they saw the headline for the Time article. But yet they didn't think critically about it or put any sort of thought into their reaction at all.


    Seriously, let's not be emotional reactionaries!
    __________________________________________________ ________________
    "A politician will do almost anything to keep their job, even become a patriot" - Hearst

  15. #13

    Here's What's Behind Rand Paul's New Defense Spending Proposal

    "This is one amendment, not a budget proposal from Senator Paul"

    Here's What's Behind Rand Paul's New Defense Spending Proposal
    By David Weigel - Mar 26, 2015

    Buried in the tree of amendments to the budget resolution is Kentucky Senator Rand Paul's SA 940. It begins with this: “On page 14, line 2, increase the amount by $76,513,000,000.” As Bloomberg's Kathleen Miller and Erik Wasson report, Paul's proposal would plus up defense spending by almost $190 billion over the next two years.

    According to Time, it represented “an about-face on a longstanding pledge to curb the growth in defense spending.”

    According to the Huffington Post, Paul channeled his “inner Tom Cotton.”

    According to Reason magazine (where I worked from 2006 to 2008), “it ain't gonna help at all with libertarians who see in Paul their best hope for a major party politician whom they would vote for in a presidential race.”

    Across the Internet, Paul's amendment is being read as a strategic retreat from fiscal hawkishness. He arrived in the Senate and proposed a draconian budget in which defense spending would have been cut to $542 billion in 2016, with war funding zeroed out. Unsurprisingly, Paul's staff sees no reversal, no retreat.

    “It is done in response to others in both chambers who are attempting to add to defense spending—some way more than Senator Paul's amendment—without paying for it,”
    said Paul spokesman Doug Stafford in an e-mail. “Senator Paul believes national defense should be our priority. He also believes our debt is out of control. This amendment is to lay down a marker that if you believe we need more funding for national defense, you should show how you would pay for it. No one should be seeking increased funding for anything by increasing our debt."

    In interviews over the years—all of them after the 2011 budget proposal—Paul has indeed hinted at this. In 2012, he pre-empted arguments in favor of restoring the defense funding cut in sequestration by saying that really necessary defense spending could be restored.

    “To me, that means that the top line number is lower, and if you really believe in savings in the military budget or else you’d have to find the savings, you’d be forced to find the savings,” he said. “If they could offset it with true one-to-one spending cuts somewhere else, I might consider supporting that.”

    Paul can point to other examples of that pitch. Just this weekend, in response to a town hall question in Exeter, N.H., Paul cited the former Navy Secretary John Lehman to say that credible people wanted the defense appropriators to “make choice” and make cuts. “I can't tell you the exact amount to spend on the military,” he said. “It's not a blank check.”
    ...
    That can be squared with what Paul is doing now, but his office did not haul out the trumpets and cheerleaders to announce the amendment. Yet his amendment cuts $21 billion from the 2016 budget for international affairs; $20 billion from education, training, employment, and social services; $14 billion from general science, space, and technology; and $41 billion from income security. With Texas Senator Ted Cruz, who is already running for president, he introduced an amendment cutting $11.2 billion from the Natural Resources and Environment budget for 2016. Paul's cuts to non-defense spending added up to more than the new defense spending.
    ...
    “This is one amendment, not a budget proposal from Senator Paul,” argued Stafford. “It is one small snapshot of how to pay for defense spending. Senator Paul has put forth entire fully balanced budgets. He has more amendments (like an amendment coming up later on overseas emergency spending, where he will also propose cuts to pay for it). The point of the amendment today is to show that you need to be fiscally responsible. The time of funding any priorities—even vital ones like national defense—on a credit card, needs to end.”
    ...
    More: http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/ar...nding-proposal
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Pharma-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul

    Proponent of real science.
    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  16. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    Yes that is very disappointing too. Since when did we start trusting the MSM headlines?

    Everyone went into a conniption when they saw the headline for the Time article. But yet they didn't think critically about it or put any sort of thought into their reaction at all.


    Seriously, let's not be emotional reactionaries!
    *some* of these people are the same ones who call others stupid sheeps for believing what the newz tells them.

  17. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    Yes that is very disappointing too. Since when did we start trusting the MSM headlines?

    Everyone went into a conniption when they saw the headline for the Time article. But yet they didn't think critically about it or put any sort of thought into their reaction at all.


    Seriously, let's not be emotional reactionaries!
    Yea, it has nothing to do with the MSN because they actually reported the truth. The problem is that there are still other areas where Rand appear neoconish. For example, I am still waiting to hear the angle or the gotcha part on arming the Kurds and forcefully carving out a piece or Syria and Iraq for the them. That Rand will propose a serious increase the budget is not something that's unlikely

  18. #16
    Rand is certainly a player, but who is getting played?
    The enemy of my enemy may be worse than my enemy.

    I do not suffer from Trump Rearrangement Syndrome. Sorry if that triggers you.



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    Rand is playing chess, not checkers.
    Hofstadter's Law: It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's Law. -Douglas Hofstadter

    Life, Liberty, Logic

  21. #18

  22. #19
    I don't really see how anyone was "trolled." Just seems like spin to me. Rand is now on the record as supporting defense spending which will be good for appealing to neocon republicans, and his team is in the process of spinning it in a way to make it digestible to his base. Typical politics. Good political strategy but not good policy.

  23. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by jct74 View Post

  24. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by jct74 View Post
    That picture is priceless. Rand's facial expression is hilarious and Rubio just looks dismayed.
    "I know the urge to arm yourself, because that’s what I did. I was trained in firearms. When I walked to the hospital when my husband was sick, I carried a concealed weapon. I made the determination that if somebody was going to try to take me out I was going to take them with me."

    Diane Feinstein, 1995

  25. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by brandon View Post
    I don't really see how anyone was "trolled." Just seems like spin to me. Rand is now on the record as supporting defense spending which will be good for appealing to neocon republicans, and his team is in the process of spinning it in a way to make it digestible to his base. Typical politics. Good political strategy but not good policy.
    What policy? It was not intended to be policy and it never had a chance of becoming policy. Mission accomplished
    Hofstadter's Law: It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's Law. -Douglas Hofstadter

    Life, Liberty, Logic

  26. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by jct74 View Post
    Caption this photo.

    Rand: "Marco.........Polo".
    9/11 Thermate experiments

    Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I

    "I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"

    "We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul

    "It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    The only way I see Trump as likely to affect any real change would be through martial law, and that has zero chances of success without strong buy-in by the JCS at the very minimum.

  27. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Anti-Neocon View Post
    Rand is certainly a player, but who is getting played?
    Cruz just voted against a balanced amendment in favour of deficit spending.
    In New Zealand:
    The Coastguard is a Charity
    Air Traffic Control is a private company run on user fees
    The DMV is a private non-profit
    Rescue helicopters and ambulances are operated by charities and are plastered with corporate logos
    The agriculture industry has zero subsidies
    5% of the national vote, gets you 5 seats in Parliament
    A tax return has 4 fields
    Business licenses aren't a thing
    Prostitution is legal
    We have a constitutional right to refuse any type of medical care



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by jct74 View Post
    Paul forced Senators Rubio and Cruz to choose between fiscal conservatism and increasing defense spending. In rejecting Paul’s amendment, both Cruz and Rubio prioritized increasing Pentagon spending above fiscal responsibility.
    Yep.
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Pharma-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul

    Proponent of real science.
    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  30. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
    Caption this photo.

    Rand: "Marco.........Polo".
    LMAO!

  31. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by juleswin View Post
    YeThe problem is that there are still other areas where Rand appear neoconish. For example, I am still waiting to hear the angle or the gotcha part on arming the Kurds and forcefully carving out a piece or Syria and Iraq for the them. That Rand will propose a serious increase the budget is not something that's unlikely
    Arming the Kurds is not "neoconish." You can disagree with the strategy but it is COMPLETELY consistent with a libertarian foreign policy. ISIS has made threats and killed US citizens. You have a right to defend yourself. Libertarianism isn't pacifism.

    Instead of committing US troops, Rand is arguing for the Kurds to fight for their land, which will hopefully save US lives. Maybe that is the wrong strategy. I have no idea. But I do know that it is not unlibertarian.

  32. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by jct74 View Post
    Now there is a picture worth a thousand words!
    LOL, I'm dyin' here


    Play or be played, Rubio

    -or,-

    it's all in the game, yo

    Last edited by francisco; 03-26-2015 at 06:43 PM.
    Brawndo's got what plants crave. Its got electrolytes.



    H. L. Mencken said it best:


    “Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.”


    "As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron."

  33. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by juleswin View Post
    Yea, it has nothing to do with the MSN because they actually reported the truth.
    A partial truth is not the whole truth.
    __________________________________________________ ________________
    "A politician will do almost anything to keep their job, even become a patriot" - Hearst

  34. #30
    I thought Rand said many times that cuts should happen proportionally across the board to balance the budget. NOT that cuts in one area of the budget were to fund military spending. How is this not a complete flip flop?

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Cruz is better than Trump or Rubio, due to the Rand Factor - Let's Caucus for Cruz
    By Makes Interesting Points in forum 2016 Presidential Election: GOP & Dem
    Replies: 200
    Last Post: 02-10-2016, 08:46 PM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-07-2015, 06:03 PM
  3. Replies: 36
    Last Post: 03-22-2013, 04:02 PM

Select a tag for more discussion on that topic

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •