39 votes

Rand Paul 2016 campaign - who is with me?

Senator Rand Paul is on fire!
It looks to me like he already started his 2016 campaign with successful attacks against his potential opponents.

Liberty patriots activists let's jump-start Rand Paul 2016 presidential campaign - who is with me?

https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/522366_226675287...




Comment viewing options

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

If you want to give your

If you want to give your money to Rand, feel free to do so. If you want a shoulder to cry on, however, once he disappoints you....forget it.

Ron Paul said it in his Mises Speech

People said to Ron Paul all the time: "Gosh, I like what you say about monetary policy, the FED, the corruption, the civil infringements....if only you could change your foreign policy..."

His response?

Foreign policy is one of the most important issues! It ties into EVERYTHING.

Now the NEOCON USURPERS anonymous rand paul supporters on this site want to get him in the white house as fast as possible and believe "he will be the greatest president ever."

What kind of statement is that?
This rand paul support is a sham.

I disagree.

One of the main arguments sheep made between Obama and Romney was deciding which candidate was the "lesser" of two evils. I don't think Rand is evil at all.

Nor do his views (the ones I'm aware of) seem as warped and off course like Obama and so many other politicians.

There is a point a lot of the diehard Ron Paul supporters seem to be forgetting. Ron Paul didn't become president. Nor, I believe, was he TRYING to become the president. Him running was just a way to get his ideals out.

Rand IS trying to become president.

His father set the "extreme" bar. Now he's coming in saying "Look, I'm twice as reasonable as my father." Which makes him appealing to the status quo and also the crazy libertarians and conservatives. Rand can't just come out and say "I want what my father wanted". He'd end up suffering the same fate.

Big business and shadow government folks have been able to sneak pawns into office by telling them to appeal to the people; and it never fails, once they're in office all they work for is big government and big business. Why can't we sneak someone in? Let Rand appease the big government and big business politicians and crooks. Let him say whatever going in...then turn the tables on them once in office.

If ignorance is bliss, Washington DC must be heaven.

Explain the major differences

between Rand and Ron's foreign policy.

"Once you become knowledgeable, you have an obligation to do something about it."- Ron Paul

.

1. Sanctions on Iran (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_c...)
2. Pandering to pro-Israel crowd (http://reason.com/blog/2013/01/25/rand-paul-peeves-fans-of-r...)
3. Dislikes the idea of closing Gitmo (http://www.humblelibertarian.com/2009/11/rand-paul-on-guanta...)
4. Voted for increased military (or "defense") spending (http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2012/12/rand-paul-votes...)

And just before I get hammered by the haters...you don't need to read the actual articles, only Rand's votes and words.

I said Major differences

None of your examples are major.
1. Calls for GOP to soften war/foreign policy stance http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20130126/NEWS/301260081/R...

2.“our money sometimes clouds the sovereignty of Israel.” We surely don't want to be anti-Israel his approach seems reasonable. http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=298674

3. The article you quoted is from 2009. This one is from 2012 and Rand is for a trail by jury for Gitmo detainees. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/30/rand-paul-lindsey-g...

4. Rand explained this already in a note online to his supporters.
"I have noticed that many are confused by my vote for NDAA. Please allow me to explain.
First, we should be clear about what the bill is. NDAA is the yearly defense authorization bill. It’s primary function is to specify which programs can and can't be funded within the Pentagon and throughout the military. It is not the bill that spends the money—that comes later in an appropriations bill.
Because I think we should spend less, I will offer amendments to cut spending. I will likely vote against the final spending bill. This wasn't it.
This bill also isn’t about indefinite detention. This year's bill did not contain the authorization for indefinite detention."

"Once you become knowledgeable, you have an obligation to do something about it."- Ron Paul

If

sanctions on Iran and a 620+ billion dollar bill increase aren't major differences to you, then I can't take you seriously. Ron would NEVER vote for those. Never. And they are significant.

Stop pretending

like Rand hasn't been overtly fighting for the right issues and policies. You are nitpicking.

Ron Paul wasn't perfect either as he voted for the authority to use the military to go after whoever was responsible for 9/11.

"Once you become knowledgeable, you have an obligation to do something about it."- Ron Paul

I'm not nitpicking

You asked for major differences, I gave them. And btw, Ron stood behind that vote, as do I. The vote to go after those responsible for 9/11 was not a vote to occupy and nation build.

If you want to ignore every difference between Ron and Rand and just brush it off, that's your choice to be willfully blind.

Again, I am not a Rand hater and I'm not completely opposed to voting for him in the future or anyone else doing so. But when Rand votes and uses rhetoric of a neo-con, I think it's the responsibility of everyone here to question those actions. Why hold Rand to a different standard than every other politician? He's not a God.

I will continue

to take a look at his words and stances but so far MOST of what I see has been very good.

I'll be honest I was not comfortable with him saying "any attack on Israel will be considered an attack on the U.S." In that statement I agree it was too much. I believe that we should help our allies but Israel is not on par with the U.S. and I don't want that perception out there.

"Once you become knowledgeable, you have an obligation to do something about it."- Ron Paul

Sanctions on Iran, war for

Sanctions on Iran, war for Israel, and I even heard defense spending.

Ventura 2012

His budget...

...cuts several tens of billions from the DoD. That's in one year, and a real cut from current levels, not cuts in the rate of increase. He opposes war with Iran, though he did support sanctions - this is the one substantive difference between his and his father's foreign policy IMO. As for Israel, I think if you look closely you'll see nothing of any substance, just a lot of rhetoric to placate the many pro-Israel Republicans. Yes, he said about supporting Israel if it were attacked, but the fact of the matter is that the country would overwhelmingly be demanding a war if Israel were attacked. If a President Paul refuses to launch it, Congress would force his hand. So, again, it's less a statement of Rand's personal desire to defend Israel than a bit diplomatic rhetoric expressing the reality of the situation. Recall that, despite talk to appease the pro-Israel voters, his actual policy proposals are for distancing the US from Israel, for cutting foreign aid to Israel, and against the war with Iran which the Israel lobby is pushing.

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

Looking closely....

"“I’m all for gradualism,” he said. “I would start a little more quickly with those who are enemies of Israel, and enemies of the US. I would like to see their aid end more quickly. With regards to Israel, it could be a gradual phenomenon.”
http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=298674

Also:

"Paul insisted Washington should first cut aid to countries with strained ties to America, such as Pakistan and Egypt, and only later wean Israel off aid. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has previously stated he was interested in doing that."

"I'm concerned that some of the weaponry that we are currently giving to Egypt may one day be used against Israel," he said.
http://news.yahoo.com/us-senator-calls-gradual-cut-aid-israe...

Sounds rather substantive and specific to me. "*I*would..." do such-and-such. "*I* would like...". "*I* am for gradualism".

.
~wobbles but doesn't fall down~

"Sounds rather substantive and specific to me"

Yea, like how he would reduce aid to Israel..?

WTF is your problem? Do you not understand that completely cutting off aid to Israel is NOT an option politically, and that it is NOT going to happen? Gradual reduction is the ONLY option.

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

I urge everyone to think twice before supporting Rand Paul

Rand has the support of the warmongers...

DO YOU WANT TO GO TO WAR WITH IRAN?

Massive Bomb Detonates Inside of Key Iranian Nuke Manufacturing Facility

http://theintelhub.com/2013/01/28/massive-bomb-detonates-ins...

Rand says only war if it

Rand says only war if it threatens our security and approved by congress.

I have thought more than twice...

I have thought more than twice and will support Rand Paul without hesitation. He is in a vipers den and he knows he must play a very smart game to move forward. Rand Paul is a very intelligent person, and I have no doubt he knows what he is doing. I trust him just as much as I trust Ron Paul!!

listen to yourself

do you realize you sound EXACTLY like the people who support Obama, the people who supported Romney, the people who supported Bush sr and jr, the people who supported Clinton...and on and on.

Yah your guy, their guys... it's always the same story with you people. Our guy is good but he's surrounded by bad people ...just you wait and see what our guy does.

Remember, what Rand USED to say about the Bilderbergs?... HAH!
He won't even take questions on that anymore.
Face it, he's changed. He was tempted, he sold out. Case closed.

moving on.

and

you sound exactly like the people who will support another sure loser and usher in more of the same...so whats the difference ?

"If ever time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin."
Samuel Adams

yes

but that doesn't mean i won't be reprimanding him every time he strays from his fathers philosophy and such.

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

rand is electable

I appreciate any and all comments on this site as I see anyone on this site as a brother of sorts. Do I think that Rand would be as good as a president as his father? Hell no! That being said, Rand gets it just like his father. There is no doubt he would end up being one of the best presidents ever, unlike our current one which we all know will end up being one of the worst.

Rand does have one thing that Ron does not. Electability. Rand could appeal to enough people to get elected. He can play politics way better than his dad.

There is no doubt that by the next pres. election, our stock market will have crashed under the weight of the govt debt. The electorate will be pissed! People will finally be ready for something new. Actually, I expect emperor Owebama to be impeached by then and dumb Joe might be potus. Ron made the first path. Rand will follow it.

Jim B for Liberty!

Perhaps, but

I would still never vote for him if the Republicans gave him the nomination, because I refuse to vote for a "lesser evil", even if it is a far lesser evil. I would vote for a 3rd party candidate rather than Rand, most likely the Libertarian. I would have voted for Ron Paul as the Republican nominee over any 3rd Party candidate.

Ron actually had greater

Ron actually had greater electability in the general election. Rand has a better shot of getting out of the GOP primary but his generic republican shtick won't go over well in the general election.

Ventura 2012

Even if you're right...

...that would be an improvement, no? Better to win the primary and lose the general than to lose the primary and never make it to the general. Don't you think? Consider what a great opportunity it would be for us to spread the message if we had the Republican nomination, even if we lost the general.

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

Actually we wouldn't be

Actually we wouldn't be spreading any message because Rand would win the primary as a generic Republican. Its not like he's all of a sudden going to become a radical freedom fighter like his dad once he gets out of the primary, having run as Jim DeMint. Ron Paul is a revolutionary, Rand is a politician.

Ventura 2012

Have you been following Rand as a Senator?

He is not a generic Republican - in reality or appearance. He is massively and vocally more pro-liberty than the generic Republican. Do you agree? If not, then there's really no point in furthering this discussion, as clearly we're living on different planets.

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

In appearance he is

In appearance he is incredibly generic and bland and he loves to use Republican talking points and play petty partisan games. In reality he is a lot more nuanced and very pro-liberty for the most part.

Ventura 2012

Agree with you about the reality...

...disagree about the appearance. On select issues and at certain times he makes himself appear mainstream in the interest of practical politics (the source of anti-Rand sentiments among some Paulites), but his image is still far from that of a generic Republican. He's well known by the public as a leader of the more staunchly conservative faction of the GOP. A generic Republican, by contrast, would be someone like McCain or Graham. Just read some MSM articles: Rand is often mentioned (along with fakes Ryan and Rubio) as a conservative challenger to the Republican establishment.

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

Exactly my point! That is why

Exactly my point! That is why there is no "message" with him as 'one' of the 'conservative' challengers to the Republican 'establishment' along with 'Rubio and Paul Ryan' lol.

Ventura 2012

The Electable Argument? How to Spot a CIA Op.

No Ron Paul supporter would EVER bring that argument to this website.

Electability?
Lesser of 2 evils?

Does anyone have any doubts now?
Rand, whether by his own devising or his handlers', will co-opt the liberty movement.

Who else has a Freedom-Loving Record that can match that of Ron Paul?
Who is the uncorruptible Constitutional Candidate?