-60 votes

For those who still think Rand Paul is a good guy

please watch this video from We Are Change and let the scales fall from your eyes:

http://youtu.be/3UKXpzdFQ_I




Comment viewing options

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

FYI - Abby Martin was not a

FYI - Abby Martin was not a journalist, she had a fake or stolen Senate press pass, and hence was not "fired". Worse, Rand has received threats and having someone sneak in their without going through the proper channels is a a direct threat to Rand.

Thomas Jefferson 1796, 1800, 1804; James Madison 1808, 1812; Ron Paul 1988, 2008, 2012; Rand Paul 2016.

Rudowski is a paid agent of

Rudowski is a paid agent of the Federal Reserve. He is trying to get Rand kicked out of the US Senate and sabotage his 2016 presidential run.

Thomas Jefferson 1796, 1800, 1804; James Madison 1808, 1812; Ron Paul 1988, 2008, 2012; Rand Paul 2016.

Brats

These two strike me as immature, angry brats with a huge chip on their respective shoulders. I don't have time for this kind of adolescent ranting...let's move on to more constructive messaging. Rand is trying to make something happen; I support his efforts even though I may disagree with a few of his positions.

It's time to upgrade our level of interaction and work FOR something rather than against everything. Time to grow up, some of us. This site used to be inspiring; I'm still looking for that energy here.

Nothing comes to those who wait.

She was there for RT America

One of the few places to get real news. It's a big deal to them and they probably really are afraid of possible legal retribution.

We sure do like stories like this until it is about one of our own. There questions are good questions, especially for Rand Paul, a guy most of us would like to see run for president one day. Journalists like this will keep him honest, or expose him to be a fraud. Either way they are asking questions that should be of interest to you.

If upgrading our level of interaction and working FOR something means letting principles slide then I'm not with you on this one.

RT America is barely real

RT America is barely real news. It's Russian propaganda. Sure, it's better than a lot of the other networks, but you can't trust everything it says, it does have a strong anti-American bias. Freedom Watch was better than anything on RT, it was critical of US policies while remaining patriotic.

You guys seriously think this woman who wants a "label anything GM" nanny state is more libertarian than the son of RON PAUL?

Why do pro-Rand people keep bumping this to complain?

I am no Rand fan, but let me offer a tip to those that are. This video does not look good on him, whether you like Abby or RT or not. The best thing you could do for Rand is to not comment on it and let it go away.
As one who thinks we need to nip at Rand's butt every step of the way, cuz he ain't his daddy - I appreciate you keeping this up where everyone can see it. The camera does not lie - who was thinking what is open to conjecture, but that would be Rand refusing to answer questions.

This is the article that got my posting privileges revoked:
http://bklim.newsvine.com/_news/2013/05/12/18212165-dr-stan-...

This exposes them (Abby & Luke) as being frauds

This exposes them as being frauds, all roads lead to the federal reserve. Who are the ones calling for a real Audit of the FED in U.S. Congress?

If I hear the words...

..."tough questions" or "courageous journalists" one more time I'm going to vomit all over my keyboard. These are not tough questions, these people are not courageous or journalists. These are a bunch of conspiracy theory pimps doing what they do to make money at the expense of the kind of morons who subscribe to Alex Jones. Before you bombard me with a series of poorly researched, poorly written, sensational articles from Prison Planet, trying to prove the existence of the conspiracy du jour, let me tell you that there certainly are conspiracies, but there is a right way and a wrong way to understand these issues (a serious way and tabloid way), and there is a large number of people who make their living producing and selling tabloid style conspiracy bullcrap. WeAreChange and Alex Jones (and many many many others) are to serious research about the Powers That Be as the Weekly World News is to serious journalism.

"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."

man you must be a very accomplished journalist yourself to

beleive wearechange is not journalism... when in fact it is the only organization actually interviewing the powers that be directly face to face... sure AJ may use eugenics to circumvent the real players... but nonetheless I nor you have done as much to lead people to question the status quo

Whether you think you can or you can't, you're right. -Henry Ford

I don't it see it that way at all...

...these "journalists" do indeed alert people to the existence of the powers that be, and give them certain useful information, but they also lead them down endless rabbit holes. Here's my conspiracy theory: many of the alternative media catering to conspiracy theorists is cointelpro designed to confuse people with a barrage of conflicting information, causing them to totally lose their bearings, become dependent on some guru for their world-view, and get distracted from ever actually doing something about the problem. And those who aren't cointelpro are just snake-oil salesmen. Feeding the paranoia becomes an end in itself, and it turns on anyone who tries to do something. Remember how Alex Jones turned on Ron and Rand and accused them of selling out earlier this year, and then the blogosphere and the DP lit up with comments repeating the same memes? They're an unwholesome influence. They offer no solutions and no final answers, all they do is feed an addiction to controversy and mystery - not at all unlike the tabloids.

"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."

you make valid points,

you're right I never hear AJ talking permaculture or austrian economics, it's always doom and gloom prepping. I do feel however he can be a stepping stone for many to wake up and find other, wiser avenues... after all that is what happened to me.

Whether you think you can or you can't, you're right. -Henry Ford

Self-aggrandizing "journalists"..

The closing remarks of that boy.. yuk!

Kind regs from / Amsterdam (clip) /, Holland,
Richard

R3V ON!

For those who still think Abbey Martin is a unbiased

reporter. how does a former grassroots journalist let the below quote go unchecked with no follow up?

“We live in an anarchy system that’s the best way to describe it, We live in a system where each individual is given this bizarre power to make their own decisions” Peter Joseph
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=8XO...

she does some good but is too socialist for my taste.

Official Daily Paul BTC address: 16oZXSGAcDrSbZeBnSu84w5UWwbLtZsBms
My ฿itcoin: 17khsA7MvBJAGAPkhrFJdQZPYKgxAeXkBY
http://www.dailypaul.com/303151/bitcoin-has-gone-on-an-insan...

I love Rand Paul

sorry, you cannot put me back to sleep.

Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must. like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it.-Thomas Paine

The R3volution requires action, not observation!!!!

I didn't hear them directly implicate Rand in her harassment.

Did anybody else?

This is a case where some truly courageous reporters are perhaps letting their emotions get the better of their reason.

The "reason"? Rand's voting record is factual, it is reason.

You can't escape the fact that as near as I can tell Rand is voting 100% in line with what YOU constitutional conservatives would support. In other words, Rand is almost in perfect harmony, VOTING RECORD WISE, with his father.

I think the WAC folks are not thinking about WHY Rand may not want to get involved with unmasking their true feelings about the Bilderburgs publicly.

So let me explain it as I see it.

Both Rand AND Ron know that it's unwise (political suicide) to come out swinging against the Bilderburgs. There are too many dumbed down Americans for this to be an effective strategy. Ron Paul eschewed this strategy, DID HE NOT?????

So if Ron Paul didn't aggressively attack the Rothchilds of the world, there must be a REASON.

Obviously Rand knows that the New World Order leadership is the Bilderburgs/Illumnati, etc. But he and his father have chosen to fight them by putting forth bills like Audit the Fed. THAT is their strategy.

But please don't mistake refusal to talk about it publicly with a mic in front of them with them not knowing and understanding everything WAC does.

Rand has been around the block.

Keep in mind that the last Congressman to come out swinging against the ruling Elite, Congressman Larry McDonald, ended up DEAD. The last president who challenged them ended up with an assassination attempt on his life (Reagan), and the before then the last one outright went to war with them (Kennedy, when he sought to bring troops home from Vietnam and supposedly begin the process stripping the Fed of its power).

In a private moment with Rand, he would tell you off the record, he knows the power structure.

"It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a rEVOLution before tomorrow morning." - Henry Ford

eight direct implications

Did anybody else?

Yes, I heard Luke and Abby [collectively] directly implicate Rand eight times.

Let me rephrase my question, a - - hole.

I'm not talking about baseless allegations, I'm talking about allegations based in fact, even one quote of somebody that says, "Rand ordered this."

You have none. You have only conjecture.

What these reporters (whom I do like generally) do is say they were harassed by some office, but NOT Rand or somebody directly from Rand's office.

I'm open to hearing proof, but there is no proof, only allegations, and I must ask why is there such sloppy journalism here?? It diminishes WAC's credibility.

"It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a rEVOLution before tomorrow morning." - Henry Ford

My apologies to you, underdog...

I'm working therapy to loosen my a--hole thing. Perhaps I'll add an extra session this week. I enjoyed your initial comment but for my misinterpreting your implication aspect. Such is the ambiguity of the verb "implicate" when using a personal pronoun as the subject in its phrasing. Yes, an extra session might tighten lighten me up. Hmm, just the thought of it seems to be helping. :D

You are certainly correct. They made allegations, but they presented no evidence implicating Rand, directly or indirectly. Yes, WAC diminishes their credibility here. Their credibility may have been increased had they hired an actual journalist to investigate their allegations, to uncover any facts that might actually implicate Rand.

peace,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Dr0WgduMRo

My apologies for inflammatory language.

Peace.

Thank you!

"It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a rEVOLution before tomorrow morning." - Henry Ford

Rand Paul refused to be interviewed

because he knew he was going to get some tough questions. Rand knows he sold out - and doesn't want to answer for it.

That's how I see it. This is the same thing wearechange does for ANY politician who refuses to be interviewed. There's no other way to expose a politicians willful intent to conceal their real views. Which by the way is called LYING.

I give Luke and his friend from RT the BRASS BALLS award for sticking their neck out on this one and separating the wheat from the chaff.

Rand refused no such thing!

Rand gave Luke a great interview two years ago. Luke did not release that video footage until this year in the context of slamming Rand. In June of this year Rand invited Luke for a non-impromptu interview. Luke clearly did not follow up on that invitation. Luke is clearly less interested in interviewing politicians than he is in posting shock-jock youtube demagoguery.

Let me ask this...

Would this have happened to this reporter had the same situation occurred to Ron Paul?

Would Ron Paul ever resort to these types of tactics?

how do they know it was

how do they know it was because rand paul? I HIGHLY doubt they were there all day and only talked to rand paul and not any other senators. This one actually does look like they did this video for youtube views.

Level heads, fellow patriots...

This post is two reporters stating their experiences of asking a major leader in the liberty movement some tough questions. Choose to believe it or not as you wish, but the mass down-voting of not only the post itself but also every comment remotely in support of the post tells me that we have a few heads in the sand in the movement, or at least here on the DP. If you hold any one individual in such high regard that you believe they are incapable of tyrannical behavior, and you denigrate anyone who raises questions about them, then you are susceptible to the very tyranny against which you fight. Thank God we have Rand in the Senate, but we cannot hold him on a pedestal! If these threats actually took place, it's a serious problem, and if it cannot be discussed openly on the DP, then where? Ron proved himself over a period of 30 years...Rand cannot be given a free pass because of his last name.

Refreshing.

NOBODY gets my rubber stamp. PERIOD.

Exactly right.

Exactly right.

Word of Advice

Anyone who needs to "see you in person" to "hear your side of the story" is not being honest with you. How gullible can you be? Saying no is an acceptable answer. Hanging up is an acceptable response. Even Senators have the right to ignore questions if they want; Ron Paul wouldn't go on some programs he knew were loaded against him, Rand Paul has the right to do the same and let the chips fall where they may.

This is a response to John Robb, below

Ok everyone, watch the videos in reverse order. Or in the original order. Or skip back and forth between them for all I care.

I just put them up there for everyone to be able to draw their own conclusions.

FYI... as for Luke "holding back" the original Rand video... you are watching a newer video he made with commentary on Rand's flip-flopping, not the original from years back.

Obviously the order of my videos is a distraction from the real issue. The press's job is to ask hard, real questions of everyone. It's not to play favorites.

For example, someone in the press needs to be asking Ron Paul if he knew Jesse "Judas" Benton planned to become Establishment hero Mitch McConnell's campaign manager.

I admire and respect Ron Paul. He has done more for Liberty than anyone in generations. But that doesn't preclude him from having to answer tough questions. The same goes for Rand.

To say otherwise exposes one as a member of the cults of personality surrounding these men.

Let us not forget Aristotle's quotation regarding his differences with his friend and mentor, Plato:

"Plato is dear to me, but dearer still is truth."

I like Abbey Martin as a

I like Abbey Martin as a person, but we have no way of knowing if she is being completely honest about this. I don't agree with Rand Paul's endorsement of Romney but Rand Paul still has a good voting record (except for his 'yes' vote on iranian sanctions) and that's what we should judge him by. I will fully support him if he runs in 2016. He's not perfect, but he's our best chance to audit the fed and end the wars.

Brad

You might want to amend that

You might want to amend that "except" line. He didn't vote just once for Iran sanctions. He voted for them at least twice. Also, he voted for a Libya No Fly Zone (via unanimous consent). Oh....I forgot something. He also voted FOR increased taxpayer aid to Israel.