25 votes

Rand Paul Strikes Back Against Obama-Care

Rand Paul is the only Senator telling it like it is when it comes to the TSA, drones, the FED, Obama-Care and so much more. He is not perfect, but when it comes to defending liberty he is the best we have in the Senate.

Continue:
http://www.infowars.com/rand-paul-strikes-back-against-obama...

Comment viewing options

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

Rand only has credibility if he strikes back at romneycare at th

the same time. if he only criticizes obamacare while not admitting gop romneycare was equally a nightmare, then rand is just playing petty destructive politics.

when you behave like rand and don't really shed light on your own leaders but help hide them like he does with romney, then rand is not working for his country or family but only for his evil masters. and those who like rand or have positive things to say about him like this infowars article are not doing liberty any good, other than saying that liberty is only worth defending if we stand up for one side of estab at the same time.

jj

I don't know whether Rand has

I don't know whether Rand has ever spoken on Romneycare, but he's given no indication that he wouldn't criticize it if asked. Despite his endorsement, he recently took Romney to task for suggesting that he could unilaterally start a war with Iran as president

"if asked" is the problem with rand and your comment.

rand doesn't need to be asked to criticize romney or romneycare. he shouldn't be speaking lopsided and causing divisions when only speaking of obamacare. if he can't deliver balanced speech, then he is making things worse by speaking in the first place.

there is nothing to gain in speaking out against obamacare. that is a done deal, anyone who says they are 'conservative' are against it publicly. so rand is just talk. but you can make a difference only if you say it is not only obamacare, but romneycare/socialized medicine that are a flaw.

if you pick on one side only, but leave the other side alone by making excuses that the reporter did not ask, then you are playing stupid and not working for the american people at all.

people need to understand this or forever they will be fooled by leaders.

jj

Well considering the recent

Well considering the recent Supreme Court decision, it's not a surprise that he's talking about Obamacare. How exactly is he causing divisions by speaking out against it btw? I understand your point about being balanced and fair, but that doesn't mean he or anyone else is obligated to criticize both sides in every time he talks about any topic. Does Ron Paul criticize Romneycare every time he talks about Obamacare? Does Ron Paul criticize both sides every single time he talks about any subject? He often does, but no one does it all the time. Rand, all on his own, wrote an article in NRO criticizing Romney's rhetoric on Iran. Nobody asked him about it, so it seems that he has no problem going after Romney without prompting. And he also didn't criticize Democrats in that article, despite the fact that many of them have had belligerent rhetoric over Iran in recent years.

I actually tried to read the comments on that article

on a full stomach. I usually make fun of Jones for being a Truther and an overall nutcase. I watch him mostly for entertainment. But, his followers are complete wackos. Alex Jones is actually quite level-headed compared to his so-called followers. I would seriously like for anyone of those idiots commenting on that article to name me two Senators out of the 100 we have who are better than Rand Paul. I guarantee you none of them come from a state where they can say, "My Senator is better than Rand Paul." The whole lot of them are a bunch of Leftist, anarchist freaks.

And they say the same thing about Paul supporters

And it is a lie.

writing a comment does not make a person a supporter

you can't judge anything by the comments made on it

honestly

don't judge the article by the comments. I wouldn't even comment on an infowars article because it would mean sharing a page with mentally ill people in the comments.

Oh no. I thought the article was great.

I was just commenting on the comments on the article, not the article itself.

Cool

(I upvoted you by the way)

No idea what you've said that's so controversial but you were at -3 at one stage. (my best is -11 lol)

The best we have?

Rand's corporatist leanings are not the result of a libertarian or even a capitalist mindset. They are the result of pure and selfish greed. The most basic elements that sustain life are being reduced to a cash product by a morally bankrupt elite for greater and greater wealth. These elite corporatists are hell-bent on controlling our government's policies and legislation through politicians who have also become morally bankrupt. Rand has joined the ranks of the morally bankrupt by accepting payoffs from some of these corporate elite.
Rand has received $17,000 from the Koch campaign and $10,000 from the Citizens United Super PAC. Isn't a politician considered pro corporation rather than pro individual rights when he accepts cash from these types of folks?

"I'm as mad as hell, and I'm not going to take this any more!"
- Howard Beale

Accepting money from someone

Accepting money from someone means nothing unless you allow that money to buy influence. Ron Paul has not let any of the people who donate to his campaign to buy influence, and there's no indication that Rand has supported "corporatist" policies. He's fought to eliminate subsidies and other government benefits to corporations. And in this day and age, $27,000 in a Senatorial campaign isn't much

liberty is doomed when truth gets downvoted.

many rp supporters like those that downvoted you are serial hypocrites. on one hand, they say they are against lobbyists and corrupt money, but on the other hand love it when they get handouts from the same corrupt hands.

just like most rp supporters saluted theil for his money even though he is a long time bilderberg insider, and all rp supporters know this and support bilderberg as long as they get a fake pat in the back along with a hard kick.

jj

Ron Paul received $500 from Stormfront owner Don Black

does than make Ron Paul a neo-nazi? Also, Virginia Abernathy, board member and currently vice-presidential candidate of the White Supremacist political party American Third Position (A3P) donated over $4000 to Rep. Paul, $2275 for his currently presidential campaign alone.

After you googled that (supposing you weren't aware of it), I guess you either will apologize to everyone here for claiming that if a politician accepts money from people that he is like those people, or you will want to forsake Ron Paul.

There are "better" politicians...and WORSE ones.

Even if everything said about Rand Paul in Maddy's post is true--and it probably is--the fact remains that compared with the likes of John McCain or Lindsay Graham, with Dianne Finestein or Al Frnaken, He IS a much better Senator--and libertarian--than the other corporatists!

His support of sanctions for Iran, his endorsement of Mitt Romney, and other betrayals notwithstanding, they are no different, and worse, than the similar measures endorsed by other politicians in Congress generally, and in the Stupid Party in particular. They also DON'T embrace ANY libertarian measures at all, unlike Rand Paul!

This is why WE must keep up the pressure, firmly criticize when there is backsliding (including withholding campaign contributions) and warmly praise when they move 'freedomward'. If we don't, nobody else will!

Over time, even the more pragmatic and centrist politicians will learn that it is worthwhile ot pay more attention to us, and less attention to the criminal elements who currently hold sway in DC.

PEACE AND FREEDOM!!

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is not to be attacked successfully, it is to be defended badly". F. Bastiat

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, finally they attack you, and then you win"! Mohandas Gandhi

I agree

Rand is still 100 times better than almost any politician (except for Ron). Is he worthy of being at the helm of the liberty movement? I'm not sure, but he is still much better than most.

Chip Off the Old Block

Ron Paul recieved money from white supremacists.

I think Ron Paul was right: he is not responsible for every last individual who supports him. If that individual is a bad person, then it is better that he has their money, anyway.

When you see who supports a candidate, it may be an indication of whether they think that candidate will do them any good, or it may be an attempt to make sure an incumbent is grateful to them. It does not mean the candidate supports the donor.

I'm sure if you look at who gives to Rand, there will be large numbers of Ron Paul supporters, large numbers of Kentucky Republicans, large numbers of people who work for Kentucky industries, and that they dwarf the donors you cited.

What do you think? http://consequeries.com/

I agree...

Just look at who Obamney gets their money from, and keeps. Who's more dangerous - a small group of loony racists, or people with ungodly amounts of money and clout to actually do major damage?

When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign: that the dunces are all in confederacy against him. ~J. Swift

We're all doomed if the best we have is Rand.

Rand is a traitor. He just talks to gain fake credibility, which he then channels right into establishment-romney. And I'm not talking about people like huntsman, perry, or newt or palin, who are infact not entirely establishment. See Rand thrashes those kinds of people and says he came to washington to 'fight them.'

Alex Jones is off. I know people need positivity, but when there is not much to be found, it is unhealthy and destructive to make up positivity from darkness.

jj

Magic 8 Ball says:

"My sources say no"

Actually...

... His record is pretty clear. He walks the walk. Name one Senator who is better than Rand. One.

Ready, go.

there is more to a person that a voting record.

more impt is their management style and accomplishments. paul doesn't do any management and speaks his high level ideas. unfortunately, there are only those that talk among libertarians and noone that really walks the talk.

also, voting record is less relevant when you have a crap staff that doesn't really influence others to vote the way you do or expose romney.

jj

Chuck Hagel, Ted Kennedy, Larry Craig, John Sununu...

and every other senator who is retired or dead and can't do any more damage to the country.

EOS.

Ron Paul said recently in a video

that if he becomes PRESIDENT, he would not immediately repeal Obamacare, because there are people who want it. He would offer other options for those who want to OPT out of Obamacare and have their own private insurance. In this way he would provide competition and give people a CHOICE. He said that in the long run Obamacare might just disappear because most would choose another alternative.

Romney and Rand are pushing for repeal because that seems to be the GOP platform?? Is there a platform?? Well. yes we know Romney wants even more WAR, and I guess that is a plank in the platform.

Just found the video from June 27, 2012

where Ron Paul expresses his views on Obamacare.

Ron Paul on FOX News with Neil Cavuto discuss Obamacare 6-27-12
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5sYe-06_0X8

The president can't repeal a

The president can't repeal a law. He can only approve or veto a law. So if a law was passed repealing Obamacare, I doubt he would veto it, seeing as how he didn't vote for the legislation in the first place. Ron Paul's whole argument is about allowing people to opt out, which Obamacare doesn't allow.

Thanks

Thanks for the link.

LL on Twitter: http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
sometimes LL can suck & sometimes LL rocks!
http://www.dailypaul.com/203008/south-carolina-battle-of-cow...
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

Thats not support for the mandate.

Cavuto:...Just another example of why Congressman Ron Paul says the government should not be in the health care business at all.

But it is interesting, Congressman. You can't disentangle this very easily, even with a complete slap-down from the Supreme Court, huh?

REP. RON PAUL, R-TEXAS: No, it isn't going to be easy.

And this is why the more complex the problems are that the government creates, the harder I try to figure a way how you transition out of them. And there is a way you can do this in medicine. It is a mess. You repeal this law, it will be more messier.

What I always say is just let people opt out. Always have a chance. In education, we say opt out, have private education in homes, education; get your taxes back on a tax credit. In medicine, it's the medical savings accounts, let the patient control their funds and let them have major medical and let them deal with the doctor.

So you have to introduce competition, allow people to opt out of the system completely. Just opting out of that mandate to buy private insurance is a good step, but that doesn't solve the whole problem. I want always a chance to use the free market if you want to and the people in this country ought to have a right to do it.

So you have to introduce competition, allow people to opt out of the system completely. Just opting out of that mandate to buy private insurance is a good step, but that doesn't solve the whole problem. I want always a chance to use the free market if you want to and the people in this country ought to have a right to do it.

What does opt out of the system completely mean to you?
What does "just opting out of that mandate to buy private insurance is a good step" mean to you?

It's madness to think that if

It's madness to think that if the troops came back from the various wars, we shut down all of our needless bases around the world and wasteful government departments were eliminated, there would be a massive surplus of funds to potentially use for people with absolutely no options due to no fault of their own. The whole system should collapse into a black hole.

Agree. Frustrating.

Maybe it just goes back to the FED running up expenses and encouraging big government with unlimited printing of money and debt.