3 votes

Is Rand For Us Or Not?

Saw this on "From the Trenches" Worries Me. You Decide what to make of it. This is Ben Swann's Take On the NDAA 2013 How can ANYTHING that Feinstein is in on be good anyway?
The Truth Behind the 2013 NDAA- Part 1: The Feinstein/Lee Amendment

http://youtu.be/LWGcyatZt-A

Comment viewing options

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

I'm learning a lot from Rand

I learned a lot from RP and I'm learning a lot from SENATOR Rand Paul.. whole new deck of cards.. a lot to learn.. so I am greatly appreciative to Rand for educating me about compromise.

All government — indeed, every human benefit and enjoyment, every virtue and every prudent act — is founded on compromise and barter. Edmond Burke 1791

Rand knows why he's compromising and what he's bartering, because he's got a goal, "restoring the Republic", and he understands he's not at a fast food chain demanding freedom fries, but he's playing with a loaded deck. He is doing better than sustaining, but at the moment, thriving. We all can learn from Rand.

if you have to ask the question...

...I guess that says alot about Rand.

who is *us*?

--

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

Your Post Is Quite Ignorant...

... you take one scenario to make your argument. Rand is busy fighting other bills too...

http://www.dailypaul.com/267659/rand-paul-discusses-his-amen...

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

www.randpac2016.com

https://twitter.com/randpac2016

I went to your profile page

you are really hung up on Rand Paul. I would prefer to be more objective. I have been disappointed in several people that I had a lot of hope in. Rand is just one of them. Just about everyone out there that I had faith in has let me down. Except Ron Paul and Judge N and Ben Swann. (As of yet) Even Jesse Ventura is starting to worry me. I think he sold out to keep Conspiracy Theory on air. I don't know who to trust anymore.

skippy

I am starting to think

that people on DP are no longer able to be objective. I put out a post from BEN SWANN and get accused of being ignorant. I am not making this stuff up. Acting like I have personally attacked you for showing this video seems childish. Besides, I never even accused Rand. BEN DID! I simply asked your opinions on what his motives might be. How does that make ME ignorant? What happened to all the Ben Swann worship? Does it only apply when his info fits into your view of how things are? My, my, maybe Rand isn't the be all. Once again (and for the millionth time) I say, Time will tell about Rand!

skippy

The Title Of Your Post...

... "Is Rand For Us Or Not". You are sounding as if we should base our entire view on Rand Paul off this one video. This video has already been posted so it wasn't out of just wanting to share it.

http://www.dailypaul.com/267585/ben-swann-the-truth-behind-t...

Maybe that isn't what you meant but based off how I took it was an ignorant statement.

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

www.randpac2016.com

https://twitter.com/randpac2016

You ain't a kiddin'.

Reading through the comments and voting below is quite eye-opening. I knew the Randian crowd was emotionally attached to its viewpoint but this thread is unreal. If Rand introduced a bill to nuke Syria I think this crowd would find no issue in it. I am losing faith in the liberty movement.

egapele's picture

Agreed -

and who are the "we" and "us" being referred to at the Daily Paul?

Freedom Loving and Peaceful People

DUH! WHO do you THINK I was talking about?

skippy

Thank you Ben Swann!

Paging Senator Rand Paul:

You, along with Senators Dianne Feinstein and Mike Lee, have a big job ahead of you!

You MUST, for starters, EXPLICITLY prohibit the executive (especially the military) from exercising powers of arrest, detention, imprisonment, or any other law-enforcement functions!

You also must add some teeth to such an amendment, providing for civil and criminal penalties for Military/White House officials who defy Congressional authority on this issue.

Senator Paul, are you up to introducing a new and better amendment, and more importantly getting it passed?

Millions of your supporters, both in Kentucky, and around the USA, are very interested in your actions regarding this matter!

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 With You...

... but you must look at the facts. Amash tried to pass a really radical amendment in the House and look where it went, nowhere. Rand Paul saw that and realized that the NDAA was going to pass anyway so he decided that this bill would at least make more Americans more aware of indefinite detention even if the title isn't exactly law. And by the way, one question I would like to ask everyone before they down-vote me. If this amendment really did nothing to protect us from indefinite detention then why did McCain, Graham and Levin spend so much time defending the bill when this amendment was taken out?

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

www.randpac2016.com

https://twitter.com/randpac2016

Amash's (temporary) failure

It went nowhere in the House because too many congressvermin (of both Parties) are still ignorant of the fact that there IS a constitutency of liberty out here! We have to find more and better ways of informing them that public opposition to these hateful pieces of legislation is growing rapidly enough and numerous enough to cost them their office if they vote the wrong way.

The same considerations hold true for Rand Paul in the Senate as well during the next four years.

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

Because those three scumbags

don't care of their constituents think they are heartless tyrants. They have no fear of retribution.

Unlike Rand, they aren't trying to do an end run around the randfan's heart strings. Despite being disgusting human beings and treasonous Senators, they are more honest than Rand, who is still trying to run a bluff.

Have you ever...

Have you ever seen McCain and Graham promote anything that was good for humanity?

Maybe I just can't see the "for us"

for the treason?
OK, I just thought it was funny. Although I consider every politician guilty of treachery at this point, Rand is among the least guilty.

Love or fear? Chose again with every breath.

Okay Maybe

I worded the Heading Wrong. Just wondering if he cares about US or HIMSELF. Not sure.

skippy

Randall is for himself...

Whether or not his actions align with the goals of the Liberty Movement is the question. At the root, all people have selfish motives; some are detrimental and some are beneficial to others.

I Don't Ever See

RON PAUL show selfish motives. Rand however?

skippy

Well see what he does on

Feinsteins gun control/confiscation bill.

Not

f

sovereign

I thought all of the feeble minded Rand haters

were in a big hurry to go languish in an irrelevant third party. Don't let us stop you. Why do you care about what Rand Paul is doing? He's in the republican party. You reject the party but are somehow totally obsessed with it. How about you STFU for a while.

Another 'Cult of Rand' Acolyte Speaks...

How about those who advocate liberty view all those who are elected through skeptical glasses?

Oh, that's right, when the son of Ron, aka, Lil' Rand Paul is involved, the 'Cult of Rand' minions emerge and mindlessly defend, rationalize and justify even the thought that he may be up to things that do not comport with liberty.

Since the two wings of the globalist-collectivist party have a complete lock on government, how about we measure both the republican-wing and the democrat-wing of that party, with the same yardstick, eh?

I Posted This

just to see if people here would respond in a reasonable, open-minded manner. I mean it's Ben Swann saying it for crying out loud! It is interesting to see human nature kicking in. I have always hoped that people on DP were more intellectual than the mindless masses out there. On some subjects however, there is a group here that is as narrow-minded and dead set as any other "cult" out there. When it comes to Rand, you have people that REFUSE to even "go there" BTW, if I could undo the downvotes for your comment I would.

skippy

Understood...

...and appreciated.

I can see no reason for down-voting my comments for the substance of it, e.g., advocating an equal skeptical assessment and using a constitutional yardstick to measure all elected officials, regardless of 'party'.

I must conclude that it was my reference to Lil' Rand, which caused the emotive reaction, thus my 'Cult of Rand' assessment is borne out, once again.

The thread was illustrative, to be sure. Thanks for posting it.

No, I just suggested that you punks shut up

pretty simple, had nothing to do with rationalizing, justifying etc . . of course you're free to continue to run your stupid gibbering mouths.

You have tipped your hand

Whenever someone starts with the ad hominem attacks, I know that they have no intellectual arguments to try to persuade folks.

Rand's pattern of working against the cause of liberty is well known so let's let the facts speak for themselves.

Mark

not interested in persuading you

in regard to Rand Paul, just requesting that you shut up . .

Please

Please provide me the address of your parents so I can go slap them for raising such a rude person.

Request Denied

I think that I will continue to call things the way they are.