34 votes

ReasonTV: What Rand Paul is up against; Howard University Audience's Reaction


ReasonTV | Apr 11, 2013

"I come to Howard today, not to preach, or prescribe some special formula for you but to say I want a government that leaves you alone, that encourages you to write the book that becomes your unique future."

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) spoke to an audience at the historically black college Howard University yesterday. The junior senator from the Bluegrass State said he wanted to start a conversation between African-American voters and Republicans, who pulled just 7 percent of the black vote in the 2012 presidential race.

Reason TV's Nick Gillespie and Meredith Bragg talked with students and attendees to see what they thought of Paul's talk and his libertarian positions on military intervention, the drug war, sentencing reform, government regulation, and school choice.

More at: http://reason.com/reasontv/2013/04/11/sen-rand-paul-at-howar...

See the full speech at: Rand Paul Howard University Speech

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

Principles Unite, Issues divide

Without doing so with intention, I think this points it out.

Most Main Stream Democrats and Republicans see each other as the enemy, when they both desire the same goal.

Of course the media will exploit the 'welfare moms' as black and paint the picture for the masses, while never exposing the bigger picture of the destruction of ALL family.

All this while people give up their rights and choose a side.

Bottom line - Rand has guts and is trying to shape the GOP

I bet he won't get the nomination - the GOP deciders will go with someone else.

Then why didn't he take

Then why didn't he take ownership of his comments on the Rachel Maddow show about the CRA? He shouldn't run away from that principled stand. He could have said that he would never seek to repeal that act, but instead, he tried to act like he has always supported CRA.

This is painful to watch..


"Life is just a candle, and a dream must give it flame.."


Looks like we have a lot more work to do spreading the ideals of liberty around.

Black and White

93% black vote for Obama. They voted for color, your crazy if you think a white canidate would stand a chance. Racisism works two ways.

dave anderson


Rand your on a collage campus... STUDENT LOAN DEBT?!?!? Clearly people need to here some of the issue that will impact Them. Student Loan Debt is actually on young people's mind like myself as are grace period are ending and its time to pay up. Student Loans are not exempt from filing for bankruptcy, Their interest rates are variable not fixed, and Tuition is reaching record highs. you could have woken up some of the students attending Howard University who probably didn't know that.


His name is Edward Snowden

What is Capitalism?

Perhaps Rand was talking about principles above you current .


HE didn't MAKE you borrow money to PAY an INSTITUTION (Government Sponsered) to put YOUR name on the line.

You have been sold a bill of goods, not the American Dream.

And you won't get that education from a Communist Government School.

you do realize

that the main motivator in the high cost of tuition today is federally guaranteed loans? Why can an untested borrower get 100,000's of dollars guaranteed for university, but can't receive a $5,000 car loan? I can guarantee that tuition would drop dramatically if the government stopped the guaranteed loan programs. That would make it affordable to more people who truly want to attend a university. It would mean more to them, and would stop wasting your tax money on college drop outs.

His name is Edward Snowden

What is Capitalism?

Sure discharge car loans

Sure discharge car loans while you are at it! Hey why not home loans and payday loans!


New political Party and Candidate advocating the abolition of all taxation



This new party will never

This new party will never gain widespread adoption because too many voters desire free stuff. As long as there are politicians ready and willing to pander to voters, taxes will forever be a part of life.


1) Politically speaking, I prefer not to speak in absolutes (ie. "will NEVER gain widespread adoption" or "taxes will FOREVER be a part of life") and consign oneself to failure

2) Arguing that public domain is essentially distinguished by conscientious gift (ex. free museums or toll-free roads), I believe the larger issue is about how such means are obtained: through authentic endowment or unethical coercion?

Similarly and when given the choice (as the Candidate's Platform argues), I believe most individuals would rather assume the dignity of virtual prerogative (ie. a municipal Registry to fund what you like) while exercising the right to withdraw from abuse (inc. taxation).

In any case, time will tell concerning the Party's success

I hope no one's expecting a home run ball

No matter your gut reaction to the speech or Paul's reception, recognize that this is the beginning of a process that will be long, difficult, and worthwhile. Just like Ron Paul when he first started off had little influence or reach, and his philosophy had a lot of hurdles to leap over, so does Rand Paul's message to African-Americans. So just as you eventually came around, so will Blacks. I'm one of them.

So I would hope that you would not insult someone for not getting it the first time, cuz if some libertarian told you about the liberty message and you didn't receive it the first time you heard it, you would be turned off if that person then wrote you off as impossible. Be patient. Suspend judgment for the time being.

I am one of the co-founders of the Christian game design studio Renewal Corporation. For our philosophy and upcoming product updates, please see our blog: http://renewalcorp.blogspot.com



More blind than a blind person.

why income tax needs to be replaced with nothing

“I lean toward a flat tax. But I want to make it real flat, like zero.” the abolition of the income tax would leave the federal government with roughly the revenues it was able to gather in 2000, before the overseas adventures of the Bush years.This seemed too good to be true, and it was. Without the revenues from individual income tax, the federal budget would shrink to the size it was in the early 1990s, not the year 2000. The discretionary share of the federal budget would dwindle to zero. All remaining federal revenues would be earmarked for mandatory entitlement spending such as social security–which Paul has said he would not touch–and interest on debt. The Paul campaign responds, “Policy wonks can go back and forth arguing over budget specifics. Dr. Paul’s point is that we can eliminate the income tax & fund a level of government from the recent past. Whether that year is 1995, 1997 or 2000 is irrelevant.” A: Well, a government program is too vague. What kind of a government program? If it’s appropriating money and trying to stimulate that way and spend more money, no, that would be the wrong thing to do. But a government program of a reduced tax burden, yes, that would be. I believe we’re in a recession. Over-stimulation in an economy by artificially low interest rates by the Federal Reserve is the source of the recession. It shouldn’t be that difficult to figure out what we should be doing, because we have a lot of problems: we have fiscal and monetary policy problems, foreign policy problems, and deficit problems. Where do they come from? It’s because we don’t follow the rule of law; we don’t follow the Constitution. If we knew and understood and read Article 1, Section 8, believe me this government would be much smaller, we would have a lot less taxes, and we could repeal the 16th amendment and get rid of the income tax. A: We have to cut spending. You can’t get rid of the income tax if you don’t get rid of some spending. But, you know, if you got rid of the income tax today you’d have about as much revenue as we had 10 years ago, and the size of government wasn’t all that bad 10 years ago. There’re sources of revenues other than the income tax. You have tariff, excise taxes, user fees, highway fees. So, so there’s still a lot of money. But the real problem is spending. But, you know, we lived a long time in this country without an income tax. Up until 1913 we didn’t have it. Q: But if you eliminate the income tax, do you know how much lost revenue that would be? A: A lot. Q: Over a trillion dollars. A: That’s good. If you think that government has to take care of us, from cradle to grave, & if you think our government should police the world and spend hundreds of billions of dollars on a foreign policy that we cannot manage, you can’t get rid of the IRS. But if you want to lower taxes and stop causing all the inflation, you have to change policy. I would get rid of the inflation tax. It’s a tax that nobody talks about. We live way beyond our means. We print money for it. The value of the money goes down, and poor people pay higher prices. That is a tax. That’s a transfer of wealth from the poor and the middle class to Wall Street. Wall Street’s doing quite well, but the inflation tax is eating away at the middle class of this country. We need to get rid of the inflation tax with sound money. Not only is inflation the result of the political demands of special interest groups, the career desires of politicians, and the ill-conceived motives of economists, it was also clearly unconstitutional. Money of real value, gold or silver, was clearly intended by the Founding Fathers. If for no other reason, inflation should be rejected on the basis of morality. Inflation is taxation by deceit. Government deceives the people as to the tax burden, and who is bearing it. The working and middle classes are gradually impoverished, while the poor are ground further down. Wealth is transferred to the rich, from the hardworking and thrifty to the conniving & foxy. Monetary and economic decisions are increasingly taken from individuals and transferred to politicians, bureaucrats, and central bankers. To enforce the transfer, government officials accumulate power through legislation and regulation. A: Eventually they go into the private sector. Then don’t all leave immediately when the plan goes into effect. But what my plan does is it addresses taxes in a little different way. We are talking about the tax code. But that’s the consequence, that’s the symptom. The disease is spending. Every time you spend, spending is a tax. We tax the people, we borrow, and then we print the money and the prices go up, and that is a tax. So you have to address the subject of spending. That is the tax. That is the reason I go after the spending. I propose in the first year cut $1 trillion out of the budget in 5 departments. Now the other thing is that you must do if you want to get the economy going and going again is you have to get rid of price-fixing. And the most significant price-fixing that goes on, that gave us the bubble and destroyed the economy, is the price-fixing of the Federal Reserve. The most sinister of all taxes is the inflation tax and it is the most regressive. It hits the poor and the middle class. When you destroy a currency by creating money out of thin air to pay the bills, the value of the dollar goes down, and people get hit with a higher cost of living. It’s the middle class that’s being wiped out. It is most evil of all taxes


Rand should've also said...


"I believe that in a truly free society, the government doesn't confiscate what you earn. It doesn't tax your income. One hundred years ago, the government did not tax income, yet it functioned just fine. In this time of great innovation and technology, shouldn't the government be able to do more with less? This is the society for which we should strive...a society free of the oppressive income tax. And without the excess funding provided by the income tax, we wouldn't have such things as the War on Drugs, multiple unnecessary wars, price inflation and a sick economy with millions out of work. And YOU would have more money with which to pay for causes that YOU value."

Race Based Communities

Why is there a "community" based on race here in the USA?

Two reasons:

1). Typical divide and conquer conformist social engineering


2). People who have been marginalized, misused, and mistreated will tend to group together along familiar (racial, tribal, or family) lines.

We all know how different people have been forced into groups based on economic strata, race, lifestyle throughout human history. It is natural for human beings to seek out those whom we share a common bond with.

But the sad thing is that I (white male) have more in common with any other American in my social/economic level then any senator or politician in washington. Yet most of us refuse to talk to anyone who votes differently, because of party loyalty.

Pure insanity.

"..marginalized, misused, and mistreated..."

Yeah, I'm sure the students at Howard University have had a tough time of it. /s

Rand Paul should explain; The

Rand Paul should explain; The mechanical nature of Foreign Policy, Trade Policy, and Monetary Policy, guarantee the demise of Main Street. Until we make changes in those policies America will continue to get worse.

Rand Paul will not do that becuase he is less ideological

than his dad which is not good. There is a man who met Rand Paul in Isreal this year and he asked Rand Paul how he is able to go up within the republican party when his father was going nowhere and get on to more comittes than his father and Rand Paul said it is by being less ideological than my father. It is called playing politics what Rand Paul is doing. You have to play dirty to get up in power. That is how it is in american politics


Commented on wrong Tab


We all share this eternally evolving present moment- The past and future only exist as inconsequential mental fabrications.

Rand Paul should have said that student loans made educ

ation more expensive and lowered the quality along with putting students in debt and it needs to be abolished. Rand Paul also should have said that Martin Luther King said just before he was assinated that he opposed the civil rights act of 1964 because desegregation would impoverish the black community. governments don’t have a good reputation for doing a good job protecting the environment. If you look at the extreme of socialism or communism, they were very poor environmentalists. Private property owners have a much better record of taking care of the environment. If you look at the common ownership of the lands in the West, they’re much more poorly treated than those that are privately owned. In a free-market system, nobody is permitted to pollute their neighbor’s private property — water, air, or land. It is very strict.


The Howard University students are American

they understand the American culture, they speak English, they get it, but even though American blacks have the highest unemployment, much higher than Previous Republican Admin's from just 5 years ago, they won't ever consider anything but a Democrat. Proof 100% that amnesty for illegals would 99% vote for the Democrat Party, the GOP can turn into the Democrat Party on every issue, Gay Marriage, Immigration, Abortion, increased welfare the list goes on, but they will never vote for the GOP unless the GOP gives up, closes down the party and become Democrats.

"He will never get my vote".


I don't buy a car because it's like another car, I buy a car because Its the car I like, becoming the Democrat Party on issues will never work, we seen that with Democrat Lite, Mitt Romney.

Do you still engage, YES, but with fresh ideas that neither party or anybody is talking about, you move forward with a great plan and new ideas that keeps within the ideas of Constitutional Government.

Well, Faithkeepers

are classic too. They never contemplate on stopping milking taxpayers themselves. They think that without them worse people will replace them. Any politician thinks the same. Non-draft military vets too, they think they did something good for the country and the taxpayers are obliged to pay for their stress syndrome which is the result of their prior choice to get free education (again, at taxpayers expense.) The list goes on and on...

It takes time and repeated exposure . . . .

I was a long time straight ticket conservative Republican for many years. Back in 2008 when I heard (mainly second hand) what Ron Pauls positions were, I thought him 'kooky'. This was especially true regarding his national defense and drug legalization positions. I came around and in the last election supported Ron Paul.

Its likely that most people won't change a lifetimes worth of views after listening to one speech. People invest part of their identities in what they believe. Its tough to let go of that.

Since Rand did the speech at a university, the people in the crowd are younger. So, they may be more likely to question their past beliefs . . . if they can break past the 'liberal' collectivist social pressure.

I got the sense that the kid

I got the sense that the kid who was saying he needed money for college may have understood what Rand was saying about how giving everyone loans for college would be a disservice to them because of its effect on the economy.

But some people are truly incapable of thinking beyond the first step of cause-effect. I don't know whether it's the chemicals in our food supply or what, but they are not able to mentally push ideas down the road in different directions to see what the effects are. All they are able to do is look at an immediate effect on a single person or group and ignore the other events that happen or will not happen as a result of that. The govt propaganda totally takes advantage of this stupidity. It takes some time to explain the economic truth when we have such a complex system.

Imagine TMOT from Georgia in the Senate with Rand Paul

Rand would have a powerful ally in that voter block.

TMOTs exploratory committee site

An alternative to the MSM Machine http://freedombroadcastingnetwork.com/
Ron Paul friendly news: http://www.newsetal.com/

robot999's picture

After TMOT

trashed Rand? I think not.

"Government is the entertainment division of the military-industrial complex". - Frank Zappa