-55 votes

Are attacks on Rand just veiled attacks on Carol Paul?

OK,some are saying that the apple (Rand) fell far from the tee. We know it is not Ron Paul's fault. So those that attack Rand are basically saying Rand Paul got bad genes from Carol Paul. People like Lew Rockwell for example is basically saying that Carol Paul passed on bad genes to Rand. I find this to be horribly offensive. The anti-Rand Paul shills need to STOP IT!




Comment viewing options

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

The

GOP doesn't do what the law requires it to do!! Are you for real? How do you reconcile this irrationality? Why on earth do you believe that there is EVEEERRR going to be any kind of real honest election in ANY established party? What planet are you on?

I think

that if I stay out of the GOP, I am condoning their actions. I do not share any mantal of shame, because I joined the GOP to get Ron Paul's message materialized. So I have a mission, which fortunately I am not alone, Ron Paul is very active with C4L and C4L is supporting those who joined the GOP despite the corruption, and to restore the republic, something we can be proud of.

I don't expect everyone to be ready, willing and able to step into the GOP arena for this good fight, but I am able, and neither the apathetic outisders or Neocons frauds will detour me from restoring the republic in my county.

Good luck

with joining the collective and thinking that you are going to change a thing when they will throw you out at the first inkling you won't play ball.
You are legitimizing a crooked club. And refusing to participate with evil is not "apathy". It is realizing crooked evil pols will never allow liberty if we look to them to provide it. Time to bag the political paradigm.

they haven't thrown me out

and I hope they like ny floats with monolpily moeny to end the fed, drone drills and Liberty from tyranny themes.

Refusing to participate with evil is allowing it to win.

Good luck baggin it beyond yourself.

This is the worst

I have ever seen.

tasmlab's picture

I could imagine ancient Romans arguing like this

I could imagine ancient Romans or Greeks arguing like this about their deities. Like wondering why Hercules wasn't as wise as Zeus and blaming Hera or something.

Currently consuming: Harry Browne, Free Domain Radio; JT Gatto and Holt; Wii U

A true libertarian believes in individualism...

Rand Paul is responsible for his own decisions. He's a big boy now.

WTF?

What's the point of this rant?

I don't play, I commission the league.

this is the dumbest post i've ever seen here

first, offer some proof of what you claim rockwell said. he is a good friend of the entire family and has been for many years.

secondly i remember quite well when rand endorsed romney carol paul explained that father and son are two different people with some very different ideas.

ytc's picture

What a silly unsavory thread this is.

Did you expect Ron & Carol to raise a slave / clone family camp???

Rand Paul is

an individual and an adult.

His choices are his own and are his responsibility. The fact that he is comfortable to be his own man is a positive testament to his up-bringing.

The law cannot make a wicked person virtuous…God’s grace alone can accomplish such a thing.
Ron Paul - The Revolution

Setting a good example is a far better way to spread ideals than through force of arms. Ron Paul

No.

Anything I say about Rand's endorsement of Mitt Romney over Ron Paul is targeted at Rand, and has nothing whatsoever to do with Carol Paul.

Jason

Happy Libertarian

When were you deputized as the thought police?

What a job! Getting offended by things other people think and say will wear you out.
Asking Rand hard questions is not "shilling"- it is an attempt to get answers to determine just how far this apple fell from the tree. And, if I feel that he is too far, then I might call Rand a "bad apple" but that does not mean anything about the tree, either tree.
The thing is, I supported Ron Paul because he said the things that I felt were important. Rand does not.

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

Anyone who has spent any time at all with Carol, Rand and Ron...

...finds all of this talk about Rand falling far from the tree to be non-sense.

It is quite funny though when you think about it.

How many of your wives would have supported your political aspirations the way Carol Paul has supported Ron. How many of your wicked wives would have divorced you if you told them you were going to become a full time politician?

How many of your wives would have raised up 5 successful children, including 3 medical doctors: Rand, Joy and Robert? Many Libertarians I know can't even make a living for themselves.

Rand decided to be an eye surgeon instead of an OBGYN... now there is you first proof that Carol had a negative influence on Rand and turned him away from his father.

The second proof was when Rand decided to run for US Senate instead of Congress. My goodness what was he thinking, disrespecting his father like that?

Fact is... Rand Paul is his father, in a different time and in a different place.

And this kid is going to make a damn good President before he is done.

RAND / RON 2016

.

Please provide the link...

where Lew Rockwell said that about Carol Paul.

The attacks on Rand...

...are not veiled attacks on Carol, that's absurd. I don't expect the OP believes that either; suggesting it is only a way of smearing the anti-Randers. IMO, most of the people who attack Rand on a regular basis are well-intentioned, just badly mistaken. Some, however, I have no doubt are here to cause trouble for us. I suspect that our political opponents have long-since realized that they get no traction with us attacking Ron, or attacking the ideas, so instead they attack Rand, and anyone else who could potentially play a leadership role in the future. No doubt they would like to see the movement splinter and die with Ron. If they succeed in convincing a majority of us that every potential leader is a shill, that's exactly what will happen.

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

That's a silly notion

That the neo-cons and big spending democrats who try to discredit Rand are influencing our opinion of him. Both the right and left are angry because he wants to take out foreign aid or at least limit it. We libertarians want that. The people criticizing him do not.

So, why do you think they are helping us form a biased opinion of Rand? Both sides dislike Rand for the opposite reason. The establishment thinks that Rand is too much like his father. The Ron Paul base that is anti-Rand thinks he's too little like his father.

The argument doesn't stand strong.

Why is it silly?

The mainstream Reps and Dems see Rand as a threat; he's a libertarian-conservative who could potentially cause them even more trouble than Ron. They want to neutralize him, fast. How can they do this? Put yourself in their shoes. To persuade the sheeple, they can use the same tactics they used against Ron: he's too radical, he's crazy, blah blah blah. But how can they get us to stop supporting Rand? None of those tactics will work on us, nor can they successfully attack our/Rand's ideas. It seems to me that the obvious tactic would be to drive a wedge between Rand and the liberty movement by convincing us he sold us out. This is a fairly easy sell because (a) we're highly principled and don't look kindly on even slight compromises by our politicians, and (b) our outlook is basically conspiratorial, so its not hard to convince us that so-and-so has ulterior motives, sold-out, is a traitor, etc.

...makes perfect sense to me; it's what I'd do if I were them. And I'm quite convinced that over the last several months there have been many agents of the establishment (bloggers, radio show hosts/guests, forum trolls, etc) promoting the anti-Rand narrative within the liberty movement for precisely this reason.

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

opff yah right

Hogwash. Put lipstik on a pig and what do you have? Just a pig. Rand endorsed Romney thats it. Dont care what reason. Libertarians who supported Ron Paul are not stupid they saw what he did.

Rand has no support from me and never will. Fool me once shame on me. Fool me twice shame on you.

sovereign

I guess some folks...

...didn't require any prodding from establishment disinformation campaigns to come to foolish conclusions:

"Rand endorsed Romney thats it. Dont care what reason."

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

Foolish reasons

You sure do know how to take somthing important and simply call it foolish. Guess some folks can sling out belittling terms with impunity. You just dont get it do you.

sovereign

Did you read my post?

The mud they are slinging at Rand is for issues that I actually agree with Rand on. In no way, shape, or form are their opinions of Rand effecting mine because we have completely different ideologues.

Want an example?
Rand voted for sanctions on Iran. This is one of my hangups. However, the neo-cons love it.

Yes I did

...the anti-Rand narrative I'm talking about is not the one you get on TV (which I'm sure is not affecting you - as I said, that narrative is for the sheeple), I'm talking about the anti-Rand narrative within the liberty movement: i.e. on the DP, on other forums, on blogs, on radio shows, etc. The message of this narrative is that Rand sold out.

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

The apple fell far from the tree...

The attacks on Rand

are because he is a threat to the "system", and cannot be allowed to gain traction with the voting public. Genetics have NOTHING to do with it.
Rand Paul 2016.

Seriously

How do people come up with these arguments? It's like The Granger trying to make the case that the reason we, as Paul supporters, have a bad impression of the GOP is because of the MSM. As if the MSM doesn't support the GOP as much as the Dems or as if Paulers even watch MSM.

Point is, we aren't against Rand because we think he's a threat to the system - that's a copout you're using because you can't rationalize why people can't support him. We're against him because we have the feeling that he ISN'T a threat to the system.

We're scared that in trying to work with the system instead of around it (like his father) he will end up a pawn in the establishments schemes.

You frame people the way you like to see them because you don't want to hear their real reasons for the way they feel.

With all due respect to Dr Paul,

his working with the system for 30 years didn't change anything, but it has brought issues to a small percentage of the US population.
Dr Paul is the messenger, Rand Paul will be the doer.
What do you want Rand to do?...rush into congress, all guns blazing, with Rambo, Clint, Bruce Willis dialogue,shoot it all up and save the day?
The deep corruption in the US government has taken along time to get rooted, and now you wake up to find that you no longer have a president, just a talking head for the real rulers of the world, a lobbyist Poster Boy, and you want it fixed NOW, IMMEDIATELY, THIS INSTANT?
I wasn't suggesting that DPers felt Rand was a threat, but that the Establishment see him as a threat.

"but it has brought issues to a small percentage of the US

population."

Him doing that stemmed directly from him doing this..

"his working with the system for 30 years"

which makes this..

"didn't change anything"

bullshit.

"What do you want Rand to do?...rush into congress, all guns blazing, with Rambo, Clint, Bruce Willis dialogue,shoot it all up and save the day?"

Yeah, some balls to the wall action would inspire people...

Hugging neocon and liberal ass has been done to death and the public knows it.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

No

As we've seen in the past, working in the system does NOT work. You're right, Ron wasn't successful at passing legislation. However, the fact that he reached so many people (including myself) means his message was successful. That being said, if we had enough people like myself pushing themselves for office and working outside of the system, we could change it.

But if you work within the system, you have to follow their rules or be ousted as someone who can't "play for the team."