-15 votes

Rand has plainly said: "I'm NOT a libertarian..."

Rand Paul plainly said "They thought all along that they could call me a libertarian and hang that label around my neck like an albatross, but I'm not a libertarian,"...
From the March 17th Time magazine:
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1972721,00....

People assumed he was just like his dad.

I just watched Ron's speech at the Texas Convention again
That is NOT a man that is quitting.

Comment viewing options

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

I'm ok with that. You should be too.

Not everyone that supports Ron, Rand, or the DP is a libertarian, and that is ok.

I hope so. I am not a

I hope so. I am not a Libertarian and I have been on here for years..

I do not care what a person

I do not care what a person labels themselves. Democrat, Libertarian, Republican. As long as they adhere to the Constitution is all I care about.

yawn

this is old news.

Who cares what he calls himself. Look at his voting record and actions. Then make up your own mind. His voting record is good minus maybe a couple votes. It's not like we all don't know what people say and do are two different things. After the last 2 pres elections, this should be very clear to us. Its better to have someone say something trivial or unimportant but then actually do something that is good. As opposed to someone who says something that could be huge and impacting, then do nothing or the exact opposite (obama, bush, clinton etc). Can you forgive or look past Iranians sanction votes or not is where most draw their lines. Rand is also just a human. Humans make mistakes. If after Rand apologizes and works to remove sanctions on Iran he will have my vote. My suspicion, if he does do this it won't be until after he gets the nomination and locks himself in as the rep candidate. Gotta play to win....i guess.

Libertarian is such a weighted word any more.

then he had some molars yanked and he said

a'g ot a uiwerawian.

Which is quite clear to any dentist.

There is nothing strange about having a bar of soap in your right pocket, it's just what's happening.

It's a Scarlett Letter to be a libertarian in DC

Do you know what?

I don't need DC. DC cannot be reformed. It's broken. It's unmanageable. It's unsustainable. It's insane to keep voting in national elections with no success at preventing the expansion of the state.

Yet people on these forums keep talking about getting Randy elected prez. How foolish and naive. It's sad that they've invested so much into the hokey notions of flag and country - "blood and soil" - that they're blinded to the system's intrinsically malicious and predatory nature. And so these people see no alternative other then reforms through the system.

Secession is the solution, and it'll only take one state's courage to blaze a path toward freedom for everyone else.

LOL you're hoping to find

LOL you're hoping to find actual supporters of freedom here at the new dailyrandpaul ?

Not as many as at randpaulforums but it seems to be growing.

It was invaded a long time ago and will become more and more irrelevant in time. Well planned and executed. Look at the rating of anyone who disagrees. Oh well

The world is my country, all mankind are my brethren, and to do good things is my religion. Thomas Paine, Godfather of the American Revolution

Invaded?

I've been here longer than you with just this screen name. Rand is leaps and bounds beyond any other Senator in regards to fighting for and understanding liberty. Leave your emotional nonsense at the door. Starting a comment with, "LOL?" Come on...

NOTE: I am not advocating violence in any way. The content of the post is for intellectual, theoretical, and philosophical discussion. FEDS, please don't come to my house.

Oh wow you're so smart, and

Oh wow you're so smart, and awesome all at once.

How do you contain your awesomeness without combustion?

Rand Who? ain't no Ron Paul

He is one slick politician, though.

So slick he's even fooled Ron

NOT...until Ron publicly disavows Rand, all of the silly things people like you say about Rand just make you look like an extremist azz clown.LOL

That is OK

But he definitely does not seem as straight forward as his father. Hopefully, this will not hinder him down the line.

The KISS method is usually most effective and productive imo.

donvino

I care less what label he

I care less what label he defines himself and care more about his voting record and his rhetoric. By and large, I agree with him and am happy he is there in the Senate.

liberty lover in Nor Cal!

Who cares? Stop with the

Who cares? Stop with the labels already. Just because someone does not meet your purity test, whatever that may be, does not mean we can't agree that they would be a vast improvement over what is there today. Does it really matter? If I agree with him on 80%, that is better than the zero percent, and it is good enough. I doubt he agrees with me on everything either.

purity is important

I am kind of tired of this "purity test" argument. I don't think it's a valid argument. Would you let someone babysit your kids who is not a pedophile 90% of the time? Would you drink water that is 95% free of feces? Would you trust a judge that refuses bribes 98% of the time?

Please don't mistake my examples as somehow relating to Rand. Clearly I am not making that point. I am making the point that you can't dismiss a purity test out of hand as being too stringent. Rather, I believe that there are situations where purity is very important. Some of us believe that libertarians, and libertarian politicians whom we choose to support, should be held to that standard.

“With laws shall our land be built up, but with lawlessness laid waste.”
-Njal Thorgeirsson

There's nothing pure about a purist.

Let's just stop calling them "purists" if you want to stop with the labels. They're not "purists" anyway, they're idealists, and at this point in our history we should recognize idealists for what they are; Judas Goats leading the people towards something that they know ends in chaos and destruction.

What an idealist promotes has NOTHING to do with what works in the real world. Their system can only work in a world without evil, one that's filled with perfect people who all agree on what a perfect world is.

To tear apart their ideas all you need to do is play devil's advocate.

I agree

Rand is not a libertarian. He is a Fox News/Glenn Beck media darling of the GOP establishment. Never schooled Beck or Fox News on nation building unlike his father. Rand spends all of this time wanting to be the darling of Beck and Fox News. So of course he is not a libertarian. Ron Paul is a libertarian. Rand Paul is not.

Libertarian schmibertarian

Ron Paul was labeled a Libertarian, but Ron Paul was also the CPAC super hero...

Ron was/is a CONSERVATIVE, not a Libertarian, and not just 'a' conservative, he was the MOST conservative legislator.

Ron's conservative message is the real thing that should be focused on.

Limited government
personal property rights
Dismantling of Federal Government agencies
Live and let live foreign policies
US out of the UN
End the Fed
Balanced budgets
gold standard

All of these are the TRUE CONSERVATIVE ideals that I believed in and fought for LONG before I ever heard of Ron Paul, and I am a conservative, not a Libertarian.

Ron ran as the Libertarian candidate because he believed it was the best platform for getting out the true conservative message, not because he was trying to bring the Libertarian party to national prominance.

No person is perfect

and none of us should be completely trusted because, as I say repeatedly, our own self-interest comes first, no matter how beneficent our appearance.

that's the glass half-empty view :)

My view is that "in other people's self-interest I trust"

“With laws shall our land be built up, but with lawlessness laid waste.”
-Njal Thorgeirsson

"in other people's self-interest I trust"

"In mans covetous nature I trust."

Spoken like a good Anarchist. Nobody is more self interested than an Anarchist, yet you just keep right on face planting.

Why does the court not recognize that the emperor is wearing no clothes? Because pointing out the truth doesn't serve their self interest. Anarchists make wonderful slaves and sycophants worshiping at their masters feet because it serves their self interest to do so.

All I'd need to do to dominate you self interested Anarchists would be to hand out a few badges and feathered caps while flattering your ego and telling you about how good you're going to have it.

Being an Anarchist has NOTHING to do with defending liberty. Being an Anarchist is about wanting to buy privilege in a free market of violence believing it serves their self interest to do so.

Great!

I'm not a Libertarian either. I'm a Constitutionalist.

I don't believe in killing babies
I don't believe in open borders
and I Definately don't support amnesty for millions of illegals

Oh and just a note Ron Paul doesn't believe in killing babies, open borders or amnesty either....just saying

another joeinmo comment

another joeinmo comment stating Ron's beliefs... yet he doesnt even know Ron is an anarchist. Lmao open borders... lmao.. Ammnesty for millions of innocent people.

As far as abortion, I don't

As far as abortion, I don't believe libertarianism can be defined on either side of this issue. There are many libertarians on both sides of this issue, and I believe libertarianism fits either side of this issue. As libertarianism isn't just pure freedom, it doesn't allow you to murder another human being other than self defense.

So the point would be at what point are you murdering another human being, some believe birth, some conception, and some in between. My personal belief is about the second trimester, other than risk of life to the mother, so that puts me somewhere in between. But any of them fit under libertarianism as its definitions are not able to define this issue.

G Edward Griffin...

... talked about how communism stopped calling itself that by design -- and he now refers to it as collectivism. He talks about how they were trained to take over whatever office they could and how to speak out against "communism" while pushing collectivism in every way.

Perhaps Rand has learned a lesson from that.

Incomplete.

Can a collective be dedicated to defending the liberty of those who make up the collective? If not, liberty has no chance. There's nothing you can do to stop people from forming collectives, and if those who justly desire liberty don't, than they're fated to be outgunned and outnumbered.

"Freedom, liberty, and their common defense."

There are only two meaningful labels

Which are American and anti-American. All other labels are used by the media to divide and conquer us.

Good point.

Is an Anarchist an American, or an Anti-American?

Depends on if he follows and promotes/defends the constitution

Anybody who is working against the constitution to undermine it in ANY way, is an enemy of the state, and therefore, by definition, anti-American...

Doesn't matter if they call THEMSELVES anarchists, communists, constitutionalists, or flat earthers...

Are we defining "American" as

Are we defining "American" as the American People or the American Government. I would say it is for the first and against the second.