Holding Rand to a higher standard.Submitted by snakepit22 on Sat, 05/19/2012 - 13:25
I am beginning to think that Rand Paul's relationship to his father is keeping him from gaining the kind of support within our movement that some others already have. I've heard people throwing around names like Ventura, Amash, even Kucinich, as likely running mates, or even future torch holders of the liberty movement. Meanwhile, Rand Paul, who's credentials are not equal to Ron's, but easily equal to any of these others, is being treated like an enemy of the state. I realize Rand is not his father, but I have a news flash for you, NOBODY IS. Just because his last name is "Paul", it seems like people expect Rand to do every single thing exactly like his father did. There are numberous champions of the liberty movement who's records are no better than Rand's, and we don't treat them with the disrespect we have treated Rand.
A vote for sanctions on Iran does not make Rand a "warmonger". He didn't send troops to war with no declaration. He didn't bypass the other branches of government and tarnish the Constitution. He voted for something, something that we happen to disagree with. However, on most issues, no matter how angry you all are that Rand is fluent in political speak, he is dead on.
It's easy to point to the Judge and give an example of someone who we trust more than Rand to do the right thing in the White House. However, the same reasons that we trust Ron and the Judge more are the same reasons they have a slim chance of winning the election. Like it or not, Rands "vague" answers that don't make us too happy, are part of the reason he has a better chance of winning the presidency while we still have this ridiculouse two party system. I don't like those answers any more than you do, but at the end of the day, if Rand has a chance to be president, and it is obvious that some of this political vagueness helped in that campaign, you have to ask your self two questions; 1. Is Rand a libertarian? 2. Would Ron vote for him?
I realize he isn't who you all want him to be, but on both questions, I think the answer is yes. I think he is a libertarian every bit as capable as many of the other current leaders of our movement, and I think Ron would vote for him, in fact, I think Ron is a large part of the reason Rand says some of the things he does. I'd be very suprised if Ron doesn't chat frequently with Rand about things he should or shouldn't say in order to get over the hump that Ron has had such a hard time with.
In closing, the "Paul" name shouldn't mean that we blindly trust Rand, but it also doesn't have to mean that we abandon him just because he is not Ron. The fact that he isnt' Ron may very well be the greatest victory for the liberty movement come 2016.