0 votes

Rand Paul on Rush Limbaugh 6/7/2010

I just heard Walter E. Williams say he is going to have Rand on the show today, not sure what hour.

Part I

http://www.youtube.com/wa...

Part II below:

http://www.youtube.com/wa...



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I think Rand is doing fine

I think Rand is doing fine and will overcome. I will disagree with defending BP. When a foreign company can ruin our shores, it is almost an act of war. They deserve to have their assets seized for cleaning up and fixing the leak. It's about private property. If Obama had some real cajones, he would take over BP and I would support it.

The proper course

would be to remove the cap on liability.
That makes BP liable for the whole thing, and anything that anyone sues them for too.

If the gov't "took BP over", then the gov't would have a company that it has no idea what to do with, and any money it gets from the deal it will totally waste just like it wastes all the other money. And the people will get nothing out of it. And they still won't know how to deal with the oil spillage problem.

The gov't is worthless.
Just let people sue for damages.

your post is insightful

your post sees the good that Rand Paul represents, while recognizing that he is human and will make mistakes, and misjudge some issues.

i hope he improves and grows.

I wouldn't thing the Govt owning BP would be good.

It seems BP will certainly be held accountable for the leak and the impending clean up, but having any govenrment take over a private industry for any reason is not what I would like to see happen.

For what it's worth... Let BP fix this. It is in their best interest to get it done and done fast. When it is all said and done, go afterthem for the clean up costs and damages to jobs, etc..

Just my thoughts

....where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is LIBERTY. 2 Corinthians 3:17(b)

***wants are unlimited, means are scarce...***

ditto

Why would we want to "nationalize" the 12-30 billion in costs BP is responsible for?

After all, our "governmental emergency response team" (comprised of NOOA, Army Corps of Engineers, Fish & Wildlife, Coast Guard, EPA, and Energy and Interior Departments) sure kept this "spill" from becoming a disaster didn't they? (oh, and lets not forget state agencies and officials).

While the well containment and kill is technologically difficult, the containment and mitigation of the spill itself SHOULD have been child's play by comparison. Just think about it.

Given all the red-tape, silly regulations, and territorial battles, its a wonder anybody thinks more government involvement in this disaster could help anything...or do more than cause the taxpayers to eat the costs.

cee cee

They might have caused so

They might have caused so much damage as to not be able to pay their obligations in the 5 or 10 year run. (or longer)

If that is remotely true, then capitalism (I use the word lightly) will step in...

They will enter into bankruptcy, voluntarily or not, either way, they will be disassembled. All it takes is a few compelling spreadsheets showing BP NEVER fullfilling their obligations and they are history.

So their assets will be seized in that situation.

Bankruptcy courts are all federal courts.

It will be a U.S. Trustee, and the enforcement will come.

There will be no government run oil companies, because in effect, they already are in bed.

Like it or not, you turn to

Like it or not, you turn to government to defend your property through due process and enforcement. If someone is destroying my property, say an oil company, I do not place confidence in that company to correct itself. I call the police and I file a law suit. Could the government do a better job at clean up? NO. Should BP's assets be seized to clean up if they are unable to? YES. Who is going to do it?

I never said to nationalize the cost, I said make BP pay for it.

Libertarians believe in 99%

Libertarians believe in 99% the same thing, unfortunately they spend most time disagreeing on the 1% differences.

I actually don't think it's

I actually don't think it's 99% by item count.

Because if we made a list of items, you and I would probably disagree with more then 50% of it.

But if we weight the items, one being sound money/currency/fiscal system, and the other being non-interventionist foreign policy, you and i will likely agree 100%!

d

Very True punjabimunda, one other thing important to note

about "Libertarians" that is tied to your comment.

Since 1971-39 years they have a perfect record of achieving absolutely nothing of concrete substance to advance the cause of Liberty one nanometer down the road to Liberty.

Of course, being the rocket scientists they all are, this fact has not deterred them one bit from parading proudly about the DP, waving LP credentials, planting LP flags, waving LP banners and covering every post and thread with LP bumper stickers whilst lecturing all that will listen(other LP types) about how to advance the cause of Liberty and WIN ELECTIONS!!!

Is it any wonder that the Libertarian word is a smear in political discourse.

Thank you LPers for your, at least expressed, wish for Liberty to prevail in this land.

Please sit down, stay quiet and try not to dribble too much drool on the furniture. Memorize your LP 100 strict rules for Individual Thought book.

"You are a den of vipers and thieves."

I mean to rout you out!

-Just because you are among us, does not make you with us

-The door is wide open, anything can slither in

Hey Rand supporters your boy needs help ...

He needs help in the comments section of his paper:

http://bgdailynews.com/articles/2010/06/06/opinion/commentar...

Why does he keep using an incorrect example when it comes to the ADA?

Why when liberty gets its best shot at a Senator that we have such a poor spokesperson? Oh well. Hopefully, there will be more on the way...including Schiff.

This would'nt be your comment on the BGDN site would it

LMPG?? Perhaps your doppleganger?

kyunschooler wrote on Jun 8, 2010 4:58 AM:
" Paul also shows his ignorance of ADA law in his oft-repeated example of common-sense telling us a 2 story office might not need an elevator. Common sense tells me that the people crafting the ADA law thought of this and developed numerous exceptions into the law including situations such as buildings under 3 stories. Paul obviously hates what government does because he doesn't bother to find out what government does, he just has a knee-jerk bias that it's only going to be something bad, stupid, or impractical.

For him to compare the civil rights movement with bans on smoking in restaurants is just plain disgusting. I'm sure the smokers who can't smoke in restaurants are really suffering like the African-Americans of the Jim Crow era. Not.

Like my 23 year old son says, "What do you expect from Rand Paul, he doesn't even want us to have roads!" (yes, I know that is hyperbole)

Rand Paul is running away from his ideology as fast as a candidate can, but he's still not much beyond the level of a dorm-room philosopher. "

"You are a den of vipers and thieves."

I mean to rout you out!

-Just because you are among us, does not make you with us

-The door is wide open, anything can slither in

lol

he's still doing a lot more than you are, however tarnished he may be. but i guess you already know that.

Agree with your comment jtstellar

but I reject the premise of the Purity Patrol "supporters" of Liberty that Rand is tarnished due to things he says on the campaign trail.

Seems to me, turn about is fair play.

Criminals have usurped public office for decades by posing as something they are not.

Seems to me, poetic justice that a true LIBERTY candidate would use a tactic of those criminals to oust them.

I trust that inside, the son of Ron Paul, is very, very close in fact to his father. No matter what may be necessary to gain office in the bizarro world current climate created by decades of power being the exclusive domain of criminals.

PS-The PP is clearly full of cra*.

"You are a den of vipers and thieves."

I mean to rout you out!

-Just because you are among us, does not make you with us

-The door is wide open, anything can slither in

No, he is doing very well thank you.

Killing you isn't it. LOL

PS-The anti-liberty PP cabal daily planning meeting starts
in 1 minute; you best get crackin'.

"You are a den of vipers and thieves."

I mean to rout you out!

-Just because you are among us, does not make you with us

-The door is wide open, anything can slither in

Private Property

Really? Companies don't always take care of their land, expecially when they have exhaused the resources.

The mining industry has destroyed mountains (strip mining) and then the companies just left the mess allowing rivers to be contaminated with excess metals killing fish and causing too much erosion. Yes, I know the companies are supposed to pay for clean-up, since they damaged someone else's property, but it doesn't always work that way, because the fines are always less then the cost of the clean-up.

Oil companies buy land suck all the oil out and then leave the area, pumps, equipment and all. If you've seen pictures, they look like killing fields. The toxins that get left behind seep into the water table poisoning the water supply and contaminating the land.

On the other hand Yellowstone, Yosemite, etc. are prestine. It wasn't always that way. The national parks were getting trashed at the turn of the century before certain laws came into place.

The native americans always said that no one could own property. They thought it a silly concept. They lived in harmony with Mother Earth.

The white man came along and planted a flag and said "mine". The Indians didn't understand what they were talking about. Then the white man said get off my land or I'll kill you. What came next was genocide. With the few Indians left, the white man sent to small sand boxes to play in. Then they sent in alcohol, drugs, bad food and water and are now watching them kill themselves and waste away.

There always pros and cons and I see many on both sides regarding property rights.

Mining Companies

typically have never owned the land they mine. they lease the mineral rights from...you guessed it...THE GOVERNMENT, who really doesn't give a crap what happens to it.

"Teflon" leases

the "go around" made famous by the "treasonous".
This is a huge problem area that will be exasperated and out of control once the 20 mile wide, 2,000 mile long corridor called the NAFTA highway as it becomes weaponized.

And never forget, “Humans, despite our artistic pretensions, our sophistication and many accomplishments, owe the fact of our existence to a six-inch layer of topsoil and the fact that it rains.”

i'm pretty sure

that Rand is way smarter than all of the people on the internet, including me, and that he has a lot up his sleeve.

The "Purity Patrol"- A logical assessment as to what they are

truly about.

Just the FACTS.

Evidence they support the advancement of the cause of Liberty:

1. They claim they do.

Evidence they are full of it:

They never miss an opportunity to get some dig in at RON PAUL's SON-Rand.

Any true Liberty supporter knows RAND is 50,000 times better than ANY sitting Senator and is definitely NOT part of the PTB criminal cabal nor would anything ever make him do anything other than fight them tooth and nail.

RAND has an excellent chance of actually winning a US Senate seat. Hmmm, Rand NOT part of criminal cabal, excellent chance of winning US Senate seat, PP claims to be Liberty supporters but always take digs at Rand. Hmmmm

More PP facts:

The PP started with pure attacks against Rand under cover of "purity". Since I have been pointing out what a load of crap that is they have a new tactic-

2. Weak, grudging comments about Rand being a OK Senator and the like trying desperately to establish some Liberty cred.

These grudging comments are sandwiched between comments like-"RAND CAVED!!!!!!" LOL

You guys are so freaking transparent.

Hey but never forget these folks are liberty supporters-we know this because, Hell, they said so-ONLINE.

They are just lukewarm about Liberty when it actually has a good chance of winning elective office and the more powerful the office the more lukewarm. For offices like US Senate, they are so lukewarm about Liberty that they are downright hostile to it.

But in the end-they are Liberty supporters-because they said so.

PS-I notice the Anti-War Patrol has been fairly scarce since I started pointing out their hypocrisy for being "Anti-War" yet attacking anything that can actually make a difference in ending these wars. How did we know they were anti-war-because they said so.

"You are a den of vipers and thieves."

I mean to rout you out!

-Just because you are among us, does not make you with us

-The door is wide open, anything can slither in

RF below me wishes for you to believe Rand Is in REALITY

EXACTLY What RAND says on the campaign trail.

As I mentioned to BB below that is a well of excrement.
Why?

Ron knows Rands heart better than anyone.

Ron says Rand is A-OK.

Comments on the campaign trail are made to achieve a far more important goal-getting elected-than having the opportunity of holding a microphone for a brief period-so the press can twist your words and obscure your message.

Again,RON PAUL says RAND is A-OK. If he was not, if Rand really held many of the views that he has to dance with to get elected-RON PAUL-would not support him.

This leaves the "Purity Patrol" with only one bone to pick.

Rand is being like a politician and not saying exactly what he thinks!!!

Thank god. Criminals have been doing that forever and getting elected.

It is about time our guys turned the table on the criminals in order to oust them.

What is it that the PP idiots and fifth columnists are really trying to sell-

"Our guys MUST fight for LIBERTY with BOTH hands tied behind their backs and hamstrung."

In the end it comes down to:

Some screen name strangers claims on the internet

versus

Dr. RON PAUL

LOL

"You are a den of vipers and thieves."

I mean to rout you out!

-Just because you are among us, does not make you with us

-The door is wide open, anything can slither in

Rand's commitment to liberty

Some few examples of Rand's commitment to liberty:

1) He is fond of Guantanamo prison, supports holding people ther for nine years without charges, familial visits, lawyers or an opportunity to speak with representatives of the Red Cross.

2.) He believves in holding trials before military tribunals, just as Abraham Lincoln and the Reconstruction Republicans did, because there is little chance of a not guilty.

3.) He admires the 1964 Civil Rights Act, would have voted for it, opposes its repeal, and declines to cite where in the Constitution Congress is given this authority.

4.) He says that the judicial constuction of "regulate commerce among the several states" has been too expansive" but does not favor repeal of the numerous enactments created under this authority.

5.) He favors our troops attempting to occupy Afghanistaan but just feels there should have been a declaration of war.

Rnad's commitment to "liberty" furnishes several more examples. Will he be a better Senator then Jack Conway? Probably. I thought voting for politicians on analysis using this system is what got us to our present circumstances. I will confess that in a moment of weakness I did send Rand some money.

No one should ever forget how shabally Beck treated Dr. Paul during the Presidential campaign or the conscienceless shillin he did for his fellow Mormon, Romney. As for Murdock, he was relentless in having Hannity O'Reilly constantly savage Dr. Paul so th

Rand's commitment to liberty

Some few examples of Rand's commitment to liberty:

1) He is fond of Guantanamo prison, supports holding people ther for nine years without charges, familial visits, lawyers or an opportunity to speak with representatives of the Red Cross.

2.) He believves in holding trials before military tribunals, just as Abraham Lincoln and the Reconstruction Republicans did, because there is little chance of a not guilty.

3.) He admires the 1964 Civil Rights Act, would have voted for it, opposes its repeal, and declines to cite where in the Constitution Congress is given this authority.

4.) He says that the judicial constuction of "regulate commerce among the several states" has been too expansive" but does not favor repeal of the numerous enactments created under this authority.

5.) He favors our troops attempting to occupy Afghanistaan but just feels there should have been a declaration of war.

Rnad's commitment to "liberty" furnishes several more examples. Will he be a better Senator then Jack Conway? Probably. I thought voting for politicians on analysis using this system is what got us to our present circumstances. I will confess that in a moment of weakness I did send Rand some money.

No one should ever forget how shabally Beck treated Dr. Paul during the Presidential campaign or the conscienceless shillin he did for his fellow Mormon, Romney. As for Murdock, he was relentless in having Hannity O'Reilly constantly savage Dr. Paul so th

well said, although I don't

well said, although I don't think voting for the CRA is that bad, it was just a small part that was unconstitutional and there was about to be a revolution.

Ventura 2012

With all due respect BB it is not well said it

is a well of excrement.

Please see above.

"You are a den of vipers and thieves."

I mean to rout you out!

-Just because you are among us, does not make you with us

-The door is wide open, anything can slither in

The facts are the facts. I

The facts are the facts. I sent Rand money that I really can't afford to give, and I was disappointed with some of his neo-con positions(mainly the one espoused by David Adams that he would try to "win" in Iraq and Afghanistan). I am a single issue voter(and I detest single issue voters) on two issues: the war and the Police state. The only way this is justified is if he is lying to become President in 2012 and purge the criminals from our government via the strong arm of the law. Even if this is the case, it is still prudent to condemn those positions even while donating to or voting for him, because we wouldn't want that method of secrecy to become common practice in our movement. We need to win the battle of ideas, too.

Ventura 2012

There is much I can say to explain why I have the position I

have-much I have said spread around multiple threads.

Perhaps sometime I will explain my complete position on this in one place-very lengthy-very time consuming.

Please read what I wrote above and also all that I write on this issue. That should make my rationale fairly clear.

I read every comment and post of yours I see so any areas with which I disagree with you are not based on a view you are not WITH the program or even a well meaning hazard to the program.

Brief comment re: commenting on ideologically "wrong" statements by our candidates. Please do not misread my complete view based on this one short comment.

We are in a time is short struggle to keep continued peaceful struggle viable for long enough to avert complete disaster.

The need to keep ideologically pure positions front and center at all times is not an A priority at this brief moment in time.

There is no limit on time and opportunity to clarify ideology to whatever audience we have if we can preserve our nation from slipping hopelessly beyond peaceful struggles for power in the near term.

Re: the war issue

There are many ways to skin a cat and there are other ways to end wars and police states than by direct frontal assault. In fact, direct frontal assault WILL NOT achieve anything or will take too long.

Anyway, no offense meant to you personally by any of my comments.

"You are a den of vipers and thieves."

I mean to rout you out!

-Just because you are among us, does not make you with us

-The door is wide open, anything can slither in

absolutely no offense taken.

absolutely no offense taken. I myself justified lying all the way into the White House. I am not a prude. I even justified his support of Gitmo. I am more of a paleo-con than a libertarian anyway, minus some of their ethnicity obsessions.

Here is my strategy guide for getting elected:

Worth deceptive adoption of positions for...

State Delegate/Senate-No
State Delegate/Senate to Governor-No
Governor-Yes
US House-No
US Senate-No
US Senate to President-Yes
President-Yes

I think that if we don't have a decent candidate to run in 2012 then we are in deep trouble. I feel the same sense of urgency that you do.

Also, remember that good rhetoric doesn't even remotely guarantee good policies, and that Ron Paul was fooled by Reagan too.

We can discuss this further over a beer next time I am down in Arlington.

Ventura 2012

I am in 100% agreement with this:

"We can discuss this further over a beer next time I am down in Arlington."

Obviously that idea is the product of an INDIVIDUAL THINKING mind.

;-}

"You are a den of vipers and thieves."

I mean to rout you out!

-Just because you are among us, does not make you with us

-The door is wide open, anything can slither in