-61 votes

EPJ: Neocons Reel In The Ron Paulians

Economic Policy Journal:

- snip -

Who could possibly be better than Rand Paul to deliver the votes needed for the Neocons. What a fortunate situation. Rand, over time, has consistently proved to the Neocons that he's not his Dad and can be trusted. When it comes to foreign policy, he's as flexible as silly putty.

That's like music to Neocon ears.

Then comes the "spontaneous" filibuster.

National Stage...everyone watching for hours on end.

In action (i.e., the only thing that counts) the filibuster accomplished absolutely nothing. But the Neocons we're all cheers (Rubin, Krauthammer, Limbaugh, Beck). Buzzfeed even put together a list of just about every other bad guy that got on board.

Sadly, a large number of Ron Paul supporters took the bait...It proved too hard to resist. You'd have to be for Obama droning you to resist, right?

Yet nothing was done. Brennan was sworn in swiftly the very next day, and The White House gave itself enough leeway to drive a Homeland Security tank through with its "letter".

In other words, the ship is still on course. It just now has a bunch of Ron Paul passengers on board!

- end snip -

Read the whole thing at:
Economic Policy Journal:

Comment viewing options

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

"It should be a big freaking sign when you find yourself on the

same side as the very neocons and progressives that you rage against on an issue."

To someone such as yourself who isn't really paying attention, it might look like that but as I've pointed out, Rand's framing of the discussion has put YOU on the same side.

If you really took the time to consider all that he said... You won't though because you're caught up in the emotional moment of "we have just won something!!" to actually figure out what just happened..

I realize some of you are a little slower than the rest of us so we'll wait till the truth starts getting posted so it will give you time to allow it to sink in.. That's assuming, you're capable of accepting when you're wrong.

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.

To someone such as yourself who isn't really paying attention, i

"To someone such as yourself who isn't really paying attention, it might look like that but as I've pointed out, Rand's framing of the discussion has put YOU on the same side."

You are such an arrogant prick and yet another person decreeing themselves the most intelligent person in the room. You have no facts to support you claims, all you have is a house of cards made of opinions. I won't bow down to you any more than I will bow down to the morons that tell me that the Supreme Court has the power to interpret the constitution or that separation of church and state is in the constitution. I deal in hard facts and until you get some stop wasting my time.

People like you are the reason we have no been able to grow the movement as much as we could have. For every person we had out on the streets of New Hampshire passing out pamphlets and talking about the constitutional issues at stake we had one of you idiots out there talking conspiracy, spontaneously screaming "FREEEEEEDOM", or any multitude of other stupid acts not only turning people away from our movement ... but AGAINST us.

Any person that brings the masses even a half step closer to us is a hero and far more productive for us then you and your bullshit.

Have you listened to the filibusta speech?

Do you know what the policies for drone strikes overseas are? Do you know the different types of drones strikes used?

Do you know ANYTHING about which you say I don't?

How about answering some of those questions above.

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.

Whatever, dude. One thing Ron Paul ALWAYS did...

Ron Paul always stood for what was right....it didn't matter who he stood with. You "stand with Rand" when it is right to stand with Rand. Do you really think that that means we are all going to go along with everything the elite, or the GOP, or Rand goes along with.

Come on, give me a break.

WTF...

do you expect him to do? Not learn from his father?

Rand wants to get things done. He has proven to me to big our biggest ally. This shit is chess and not fucking checkers.

All this holier than thou crap is not going to get us where we need to be... taking a victory lap. To assume that Rand is a neocon is flat out ignorant.

I didnt see any fucking Neo-cons #StandWithRand. I did see to dinosaurs attack him the next day that represent the war hawks.

Get real. Honest. You have been a member of this movement since the early days. Take Rand for what he is doing... Lastly, point at another person that is proving to be influential to the issues that matter to us!

(not trying to be mean.. honest.)

'Peace is a powerful message.' Ron Paul

My point wsn't anti-Rand...

My point was anti-"the neo-cons have reeled in the Ron Paulians."

My point was that no matter who speaks truth, at that moment, we stand with him.

This shit is chess and not fucking checkers.

That's the divide...

We have one group who's playing political games and treating things as such and another group that sees it as deadly serious and not a game, so then refuses to play it as such and treats it with the reverence it deserves.

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.

Let them say what they will...

Let them say what they will... but when the Red Coats stood up for their honor, for their day in the court of battle, the reality which faced them to their dying moment was... that they stood... up... all in a row... and wore bright red coats!

Contrast that with Ethan Allen and the Green Mountain boys! They blended in with the environment, wore the 'cameo' of the day, and made it look as if they were receptive to negotiation, and at the same time, maneuvered those same Red Coats to that final moment which their 'problem' made possible!

Real strategic chess, played at the GM level, is not at all boring, but filled to overflowing with strategy, and replete with stories of great victories! Such is the depth of political intrigue, that, undiminished in this age of tyrannies it instead grows to monstrous size in scope and complexity!

The 'Rand Filibuster' was but a skirmish in the battle for our liberties! It's depths have not been adequately fathomed for us to glibly accept or reject it's successes or failures.

It would appear however that it can be granted a tremendous double result!

On the one hand it was inadequate in it's legal demand by the committee and Sen. Paul. It extracted a very calculated, but seriously deficient, thus threatening and insidious response.

On the other hand it was a brilliantly calculated front for stealing fame and position, both from tyrants in the Senate as well as tyrants in the executive branch!

The electorate who suffer in their precincts, nevertheless have not suffered enough to seek real truth! They have just returned a congress of incumbents, along with an executive, already stained with the blood of hemorrhaging freedoms at home in the land of the 'once free', and an equal amount of blood from abroad, from the dying lands of those who have been looking to the land of the 'once free', praying with fading hope, for their own liberty!

It is entirely possible that many if not most, of those electorate who actually vote, have found a champion in Rand Paul, simply because he is perceived as having won a battle for liberty, though completely unexpected by the 'powers that be' for tyranny!

Perceived is as good as inaccurate. This counts in war!

It is a bitter pill to swallow by the CFR, who must be gnashing their collective teeth after receiving an emissary from the 'cameo clothed Green Mountain boys' in the person of the 'milk toast', 'thin milk in the pulpit', junior Senator, Rand Paul.

Such a propaganda fight, which contributes to the psychological disarming of the enemies of liberty, regardless of the CFR motives for letting the filibuster begin, is ultimately a won skirmish!

So it becomes, in the final analysis, 'sun-shine... during which hay must be made'!

Actually the opposite is true

Rand is reeling in the neocon VOTERS...

Rand has expertly rafted the treacherous waters that swirl around the halls of power barely getting ANY gunk on him in the process.

Rand will use his position and popularity to push the liberty agenda, getting the ball moving back in the right direction.

The AIPAC apartheid GOP establishment is being suckered, not us.

Rand is separating the Limboobs from the Grahamnesties.

...

ZING!!!!

'Peace is a powerful message.' Ron Paul

Up Vote

This is spot on.

What Rand did was introduce himself to America for 2016. He is working on the Rand Brand.

Do I think he said good things during the filibuster? Yes.

Do I think he achieved anything with this PR stunt that will help America? No.

It's good to speak out against drones, and I didn't see the entire filibuster, but does anyone know if he spoke out against all of the poor people overseas being murdered by them?

And isn't this the same Rand who voted FOR sanctions on Iran, an act of war according to Dr. Paul?

Isn't this the same Rand who praises America's military after his dad posts a controversial tweet?

Our government is tyrannical, but as long as the American people can shop till they drop and sleep with whomever they please than they will consider themselves free.

The only solution to our empire is secession.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/133532.html

"What Rand did was introduce

"What Rand did was introduce himself to America for 2016. He is working on the Rand Brand."
And this is a bad thing how? Sometimes it really seems to me that there are people in this movement who are committed to keeping it as small and inconsequential as possible. You want to secede? OK fine, it very well may come to that eventually. And for secession to actually work, you need a Revolution, a really BIG movement of the people. So lets grow our movement. And in IMO, since Ron Paul's last campaign, no one has done more to grow this movement than Rand Paul.

The Nationalist Poison

Q. And this is a bad thing how?
A. It's bad because it puts people back into the mode of believing that there is hope for change of the federal government by doing the same thing that has repeatedly failed in the past - electing federal officials. The oligarchy wants to narrow the options that people have to resist them. Hope and participation in national elections is the result.

Q. You want to secede?
A. Yes. I have no hope in this government because the Constitution that people in the Liberty Movement seem to worship is hopelessly flawed. To summarize Lysander Spooner, this document has either authorized or been unable to prevent the kind of government we have, therefore it is unfit to exist.

"And for secession to actually work, you need a Revolution, a really BIG movement of the people."

The reason secession is a more viable than national elections is that it DOES NOT require a national movement. National movements rooted in populist sentiment are slow and cumbersome and have not worked in the modern times. A secessionist movement on the other hand is limited in size and scope to specific geographic territories. NO more marching on Washington DC. NO more petitioning the millionaire lawyers and billionaire bankers for redress of grievances. NO more belief in the flawed notion that 1 city ought to dictate to 310 million people - down to the amount of water flushed in your toilet or the kind of light bulb you choose to use.

Even if we had no bases overseas, we would still have an empire at home. Secession is on the horizon and I have faith no more in millionaire strangers leading me to some promised paradise.

well...

What do you expect him to do? What would you do different? Is Rand an asset or a liability in your eyes to our ultimate goals?

'Peace is a powerful message.' Ron Paul

Q. What do you expect him to

Q. What do you expect him to do?
A. Court mainstream Republicans who listen to Hannity, Limbaugh, Coulter et al., while minimizing the libertarian view of the state. This is unhealthy to growing the liberty movement because it is partisan in nature. Is the strategy to co-opt the Republican party by becoming president? If so, it's DOA. The oligarchs will not allow Libertarians to effectively shut down 1/3 of their power (the executive branch). But should it be a position of libertarians to be satisfied by effecting minimal change in a system which disregards the philosophical underpinnings of American republicanism (i.e., the sovereignty of the individual, the rule of law, and radical decentralism)?

Q. What would you do different?
A. Not run for Senate and instead promote libertarianism, not the republican party as Ron did during his entire career. What drew me to Dr. Paul was his willingness to speak out against the system without concern for how he will be perceived by the party punditry. In a country our size it's amazing how anyone can conceive that they can actually be represented by 435 reps, 100 senators, 9 judges, and 1 president.

Q. Is Rand an asset or a liability in your eyes to our ultimate goals?
A. I don't know what the goals are for libertarian minded folks other than the reduction of state power. The American system is dysfunctional because it is highly centralized. Rand is a Senator and plays a role within the system, but for libertarians the goal, IMO should not be to legitimize the National government (it's not a federal form of government). It should be our sworn enemy and we should want to dismantle it. He's definitely a liability to libertarians but an asset to the Republican party faithful.

I'm just sick of it all. It's insanity to expect a different outcome when you always get the same results. Garbage in, garbage out.

Thanks

I asked the same thing in one

I asked the same thing in one of my posts. Apparently, these Rand critics are satisfied trying to obtain their liberty on their own. They have no solution except to be morally superior than everyone else. They have nothing to contribute to the movement. They don't understand the concept of working slowly towards a common goal. I guess being an "ultra-libertarian" means no common goals, no compromise on ANYTHING, being the perfect anarchist, without any concern for the majority who doesn't agree with them.

Looking through their previous posts...

The "Economic Policy Journal" spends almost as much time denigrating Rand Paul as it does talking about economic policy.

Bottom line: Can the govt use drone strikes on American soil?

Yes.
Holder's letter answered a specific question. In his letter he framed the question and answered it this way:
""Does the President have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil?" The answer to that question is no."
It does not rule out the use of a weaponized drone to kill an 'enemy combatant' (whatever that is) on American soil and in doing so will, in all probability, murder innocent Americans who will fall under the category of 'collateral damage' - and we all know what 'collateral damage' means.
So actually, Holder lied. Americans not engaged in combat will be killed by drone strikes on American soil. They just won't be the target.
I don't know why this point is being missed.

If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.
James Madison

Actually I made almost the

Actually I made almost the same comment earlier; however, you are missing something. The person targeted doesn't need to be an enemy combatant; they just need to be a non-US citizen. A combatant, is a person that at the time is engaged in physical fighting -firing a weapon, carrying a RPG. A non-combatant would be someone who makes Propaganda videos, or who once was a fighter but at that particular time is not engaged in a fight. So say this non-US citizen Propagand Video creator is in a cafe in NYC, the government or one of its agencies or whatever has the authority to kill him with a drone; and with him, kill everybody else in the blast radius, and that is completely just fine with everybody.

So, it is much worse than what you were saying.

Yeah but they have the new and improved

ACME "smart" hellfire missiles.. It's laser guided with precision to it's target then puts on the breaks midair which is the time a wooden hammer pops out to clobber the person loony tunes style.

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.

Totally off-base...the

Totally off-base...the neocons are against Rand...a few are coming over, like Rush, but if McCain is against you, you know you are on the right side of things.

rand paul deceiving ron paulians?

i happen to view his action differently.
i consider it a shot across the bow of
the current (and past) administration(s) and fellow
senators, house members, global elitists, by exposing
the government's drone policies both foreign
and domestic, perpetual war, and defending
due process of law. it also drew out into the light of day
for all to see who are the termites (like graham and mccain, the WSJ, et al).
indeed, it created the opportunity for rand to explain his concerns
and he did it uninterrupted for 13 hours! i listened for several of those hours and was enthralled. it received over a million tweets that day! it was persuasive discourse for freedom and limited government!
i think he is also showing how americans are being deliberately divided and conquered by both parties, and showed, like ron paul has done, how to form coalitions.
if you read the history and writings of our founders and freedom fighters, that's how they did it. i thought it was a providential opportunity. and he was willing to stand alone up there if necessary!
let's rejoice in every act that ignites the torch of liberty in people's hearts. and it has.

BMAC

I don't agree with this part

"i think he is also showing how americans are being deliberately divided and conquered by both parties... if you read the history and writings of our founders and freedom fighters, that's how they did it."

No they didn't. You must be reading GRIC* history books. When our founders went for divide and conquer, if they were conquered they didn't submit. That's why there was a war.
Rand's battle wasn't against Brennan; he admitted from the start he'd vote for him if he got an answer to his question. He wasn't 'divided' on his vote for Brennan, he wanted an answer. Obaliar gave him one, but it now leaves me with more questions than answers.
Who will determine 'immanent threat'?
What if the 'immanent threat' is a false flag operation?
Why is 'collateral damage' acceptable?

*GRIC - Government Run Indoctrination Centers aka public schools

If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.
James Madison

I read EPJ and Bob Wenzel on a daily basis

And generally respect his viewpoints on economic matters.

He's got major issues with Rand that I don't agree with however.

He see's a boogeyman in everyone that is not die-hard strict anarcho-capitalist in everything 100% down the line.

Everyone else is a traitor to Wenzel.

Sorry, not on board with that.

How Did This Garbage Make The Front Page?

.

.

Amen to that.

'Peace is a powerful message.' Ron Paul

Bob Wenzel has been nothing

Bob Wenzel has been nothing but a butthurt pu$$ for months re:Rand. Pay him no mind, he's nothing.

Ventura 2012

There is a concern I have

There is a concern I have with this whole fillibuster thing; and that is the question and answer itself.

The question: Can the US target and kill a US Citizen with a Drone on US Soil.

The Answer: The president doesn't have the power to kill a US citizen non-combatant with a drone.

I'm sorry, but I cannot be the only person to see the problem with any of this.

Rand's example of a drone taking out a person sitting at a cafe; I hate to tell Rand or his supporters, but a Hellfire Missile is not a .22. In this situation that Rand has given us, a hell of a lot more people would be killed then just the intended target. However, this "Collateral Damage" seems to be just peachy with everybody. Also, neither the question nor the answer make any reference to killing non-US citizens with a drone strike on US soil.

So, if we use Rand's example but substitute the tageted individual as being a non-US citizen instead, then it is acceptible to everybody. Well, accept me, I suppose.

The question should have been -at the very least: Does the US Federal Government, any State Government or any agency -directly or indirectly- thereof or any Company or Corporation acting in accordance with any of the aforementioned Governments or Agencies, have the authority to kill an individual non-combatant on US soil with a Drone?

The question everyone needs to ask is :-

Is Rand sucking up to the Neocons to get the nomination and then he will completely go against the Neocons and Corporatism?

Or

Are the Neocons using Rand as a tool to split the Liberty vote down the middle so that the Liberty movement is less of a threat to the twin party system?

"In the end, more than they wanted freedom, they wanted security. They wanted a comfortable life, and they lost it all -- security, comfort, and freedom. When ... the freedom they wished for was freedom from responsibility, then Athens ceased to be free."

The Filibuster Was Standing AGAINST

the Neo-Cons... So it appears you're asking the wrong questions