19 votes

Rand Paul Votes in Favor of $631 Billion U.S. 'Defense' Legislation

EPJ: Rand Paul's To Do List before officially running for president:

Visit is Israel (scheduled for January)
Make sure Military-Industrial Compex is funded (Check)

The Senate, by a 98-0 vote, authorized $525.3 billion in baseline military spending, trimming only a small chunk from the administration’s $525.4 billion request. Thebill also authorizes $88.5 billion more for ongoing wars."

Continue reading at: Economic Policy Journal

Comment viewing options

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

Wait a minute.

"Of course a Neocon will visit Israel and vote for the military."
Are you implying that if someone votes to spend one dollar on the military he's a Neocon? We've been funding the military since George Washington. Neoconservatism just came about in the 20th century.

Yes, because

Yes, because neo-conservatives vote for resolutions to end the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, vote against going to war with Iran and Syria, and support reducing our military presence overseas.

Let's be real, people. You may not agree entirely with Rand's foreign policy views, because it's clear that he's not a 100% non interventionist. But he's not a "neo-con" either. That's just a ridiculous accusation.

He is trying to be "moderate" I guess...

"So because thou art lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spew thee out of my mouth" Rev 3:16

A good way to defend your freedoms: www.libertymagazine.org

Comparing politics to

a Christian living for Christ is blasphemous. But, I'm guessing you don't care.

He is visiting Jordan too...

...to hear both sides of the argument. Yet you do not mention that because you are caught up in blindly trying to destroy him without looking at the facts.....

We need to get an early start on 2016: Support Rand PAC 2016

www.randpac2016.com

https://twitter.com/randpac2016

A legacy of ashes...

I am finished with Brand Paul as he has finished his father's legacy once and for all. Ron Paul's movement is officially DEAD! Choke on your Pyrrhic victory Brand-all's... Hunter, Petersen et. al...

Take RON PAUL'S principles OUT of the movement, and you get THIS SHOVED DOWN YOUR THROAT!!! That is the "New Liberty..."

Well, RON PAUL taught me there was something better... GOODBYE!!!

HELL YEAH!!! GO McCAIN!!!

HELL YEAH!!! GO McCAIN!!! GO ROMNEY!!!!!! Let's get a REAL Neo Con in office!!!!

That'll teach Rand Paul a lesson, just like we taught all them other fakers.

WE'LL SHOW THEM!!!!

----------------------------------------------------------
"Ehhh, What's ups Doc?" B.Bunny "Scwewy Wabbit!"E. Fudd
People's Awareness Coalition: Deprogramming Sequence

This movement is not dead...

...and I don't like hearing negative quitters vent like this. If you quit then please leave this site because most us haven't...

We need to get an early start on 2016: Support Rand PAC 2016

www.randpac2016.com

https://twitter.com/randpac2016

Oh, so you only want to hear people who agree with you

and NO dissent is to be tolerated. That's liberty? Pathetic!

This is not opinion...

...you are just saying how the movement has turned into "ashes". Great, then please get off this site and stop discouraging the ones who actually do believe this movement can go somewhere in 2014 and 2016... please state your opinion but quitting is something altogether different

We need to get an early start on 2016: Support Rand PAC 2016

www.randpac2016.com

https://twitter.com/randpac2016

i think the freedom movement

is still growing, but freedom also means a person can quit and state why they feel that way.

the movement should look to the youth.
the college kids see ron paul as the man (natch) and 2nd choice gary johnson. & they are both planning new college tours. i don't see rand being able to inspire them like that, maybe christian colleges, but that's pretty weak, really.

Agree with Treg below

I agree with Treg. Throw some Charles Goyette in there somewhere, and make me happy!

Here Seems to be the "Rand Paul" style....

After having seen his dad stand on principle, vote that way and become an unrecognized statesman, Rand Paul seems to have tweeked the formula a bit.

Fight the good fight, make the case, then once its clear you lost it, vote with the pack.

And why vote with the pack? Cause the pack will have his back come election time. Then go back to fighting the good fight.

We have seen this play out in several cases. Fighting the good fight to the end for his dad, then his endorsement of Romney and then going back to the fight against Romney on foreign policy.

Its a strategy that says, come election time, opponents from any side can't say "You Voted ...". He will be able to say come election time, "Yes I voted for it, but I still think we should have all went the other way..." -- those are not direct quotes btw.

Its unsettling, but it just might work for him. Let Rand court the Christian Right in Iowa and South Carolina.

In the meantime... I am really loving Judge Andrew Napolitano 2016...

Yes, please BUY this wonderful libertarian BOOK! We all must know the History of Freedom! Buy it today!

"The System of Liberty: Themes in the History of Classical Liberalism" ...by author George Smith --
Buy it Here: http://www.amazon.com/dp/05211820

The pack will only have his

The pack will only have his back come election time if he runs on their rhetoric.

I agree...

See my response to Swifty...

I'm a serial entrepreneur and liberty activist from Texas!

www.RevolutionCarBadges.com
www.NonNetwork.com

After having seen his dad stand on principle!

"After having seen his dad stand on principle, vote that way and become an unrecognized statesman, Rand Paul seems to have tweeked the formula a bit."

Yeah!

What a sucker poor old Ron was for all those years, no wonder he never got anywhere.

"Fight the good fight, make the case, then once its clear you lost it, vote with the pack"

Perfect, say the right thing and keep saying it, but when it comes to legislating the law, endorse the oppositions argument by voting with them, that way we get to win the intellectual argument in the end.

"We have seen this play out in several cases. Fighting the good fight to the end for his dad, then his endorsement of Romney and then going back to the fight against Romney on foreign policy."

Brilliant! best way to fight Romney on foreign policy is to keep the revenue flowing in favor of the current foreign policy for now, after all, you got to go along to get along if you want to get on.

"Its a strategy that says"

You win?

But...

"Come election time, opponents from any side can't say 'You Voted ...'."

And...

They would be right.

"He will be able to say come election time, "Yes I voted for it, but I still think we should have all went the other way..." -- those are not direct quotes btw.

Really? They're not direct quotes?

No sense

This is wrong. His dad is right, the only honest politician.

dave anderson

But...

"Brilliant! best way to fight Romney on foreign policy is to keep the revenue flowing in favor of the current foreign policy for now, after all, you got to go along to get along if you want to get on."

Rand's Aye or Nay vote neither "keep(s) the revenue flowing" nor stops revenue from flowing. To imply that it does, is disingenuous. There are 535 on the Hill.

I still like Rand, feel that he would never betray his father and mother, and feel like there is clearly a divide and conquer campaign waged against the Liberty Movement right now.

I do agree many in the movement have legitimate concerns about Rand, and I don't doubt those concerns and critiques are sincere by many.

I agree with what Treg said above and I've noticed that too. Just follow Rand after the endorsement. He starts immediately attacking the foreign policy. Also, as painful as it is, before anyone continues to hate on Rand (criticism yes, hate not necessary), you must rewatch the actual Romney endorsement video from the Hannity show. I'm going to paraphrase for you:

Hannity: Why do you support Gov. Romney?
Rand: We have a lot of similarities:

His father ran unsuccessfully for president like mine.
Gov. Romney then went on to support the nominee as did his dad.
We both come from big loving families.
I come from a family of 5 and Romney has 5 kids.
He's had a long and happy marriage. So have my parents.
We have similar love for our families and family values.

Come on guys...this is a BS endorsement! Please reconsider!

Even Hannity IMMEDIATELY has to get Rand back on approved talking points by trying to push the idea that, "there is a HUGE difference between Obama and Romney" in true fashion. He says, I didn't hear you say anything about Obamacare and the big differences between Obama, blah blah blah, we can't survive another four years, so as to continue the fear-mongering.

I'm a serial entrepreneur and liberty activist from Texas!

www.RevolutionCarBadges.com
www.NonNetwork.com

awwwwwwwwwwwwwww

little Anakin is at it again.

don't expect ideological

don't expect ideological perfection from somebody who actually wants to be president.

there's no spark though,

he drones on and on, and he makes poor attempts at humor. he is pals with hannity whose treatment of his father was disgraceful.

Voting against the finalized

Voting against the finalized NDAA is politically problematic. Just look at the vote, it went 98-0 for a reason... if you vote against it (especially when it is sure to pass) you are painted as voting against veterans benefits and troop pay. It is an unfortunate reality.

that's how they do it. and

that's how they do it. and people should do more research into the votes.

look, if any part of a bill

look, if any part of a bill is unconstitutional, they MUST not vote for it.

Rand is clearly voting against the Constitution.

I agree with you totally...

...while there is a lot of bad in the NDAA, there is some good stuff that as you point out will be used to say that he voted against the good stuff instead of voting against the bad...

We need to get an early start on 2016: Support Rand PAC 2016

www.randpac2016.com

https://twitter.com/randpac2016

Any ONE vote against the

Any ONE vote against the Constitution is a traitorous act!

Get it straight bud. The oath of office is very clear.

Preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.

For Rand, being President is

For Rand, being President is more important than being consistent.

It would have been inconsistent

for him to vote against this bill since it revokes the indefinite detention clause and scales troops back from Afghanistan. Voting against funding for the troops that are still there doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

it does not revoke indefinite

it does not revoke indefinite detention. read the bill.

McCain and Graham think it retains indefinite detention, and after reading it, so do I.

so, Rand votes against the constitution while launching a propaganda campaign designed to indicate that he has voted for the Constitution.

The propaganda campaign. is simply evidenced by the relatively few defenders who comment on every thread. in comparison to the people that speak out, the defenders make more posts, but are the minority of the movement.

Rand said that we will see who rules the Internet, and i believe that statement announced his propaganda campaign against liberty.

Funding them is how they stay

Funding them is how they stay there indefinitely.