-74 votes

I think Rand Paul is a FRAUD and another Obama!

He has committed Treason against his Father and Now U.S. Citizens. I have NO Respect for him at All!

First I believed in Rand Paul when he ran for the Senate in Kentucky. I supported his run and win.

Then during the 2012 Presidential election when he committed Treason and was a traitor against his father by endorsing Romney, I never listened to another word he said until his epic filibuster..

He redeemed himself in my eyes when he accomplished the epic 13 hour filibuster which I actually watched more than half of. I was thrilled he was standing up for all of us and the country. I became a Rand Paul supporter once more.

NOW.... he has committed treason against the U.S. people and he has nullified his epic filibuster by going directly against it.

Rand Paul says at 2:30 point of the video below "If someone is coming out of a liquor store with a gun and $50 dollars I don't care if a drone kills him or a policeman kills him."

WTF???!!!! REALLY???

You - Rand Paul..... Don't Care if a drone is JUDGE JURY AND EXECUTIONER of someone ROBBING a store? So someone should be KILLED for robbing a Store?

How Dare you..... believe drones should KILL people during a crime instead of letting a jury of their peers convict them!!!! Also, who is to say the real robber didn't toss the person out with the gun, no one knows what the real situation is, until evidence is completely provided in a COURT ROOM!

You are not a TRUE Constitutionalist and you are a traitor, Rand Paul!!

I hope the people of Kentucky Vote You OUT! I will NEVER support you, We can not TRUST you! You are a true politician. Not trustworthy, a player of the game and I have NO respect for you!


Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

You have a point. …Too early to tell for sure though.

For one thing Rand Paul bandwagon people might be jumping the gun. …But have you thought it through?

I personally try to remain neither for or against Rand at this point.

On Facebook:
Personal ProfileGroupPage

Rand is NOT a fraud! He's a politician!

And a lot better one than his dad. Which is exactly why i don't trust him, but if i have a choice between stale bread and a turd to eat I'm going with the stale bread. Rand is my stale bread choice for 2016, he's not perfect and he is not even close to as great as his papa but he is the closest thing we've got to a liberty candidate that could potentially win something. Besides, all this hoopla about national politics is really more like a football game these days anyway, a distraction. The way to truly take back our country and the constitution is to get involved in local politics and party and help local liberty candidates get elected. If we can figure out how to take back our congress on state and federal levels we stand a much better chance of returning to sound principles, government, and money.

My three cents. (It was 2 cents but due to inflation...)

You make a lot of sense.

the pro Rand cheerleaders on this website are DISTURBING. My how soon we slaves forget. FK Rand! We deserve someone better.

He was addressing the

He was addressing the authority to kill someone with a drone, which if you were shooting at cops leaving a liquor store, they can kill you. His filibuster was about the authority to kill someone without a reason (provable). See the difference? Not that I agree...


Go back to your hole and take your spittle with you!

I agree

He's nothing like his father. He does not believe the same things. His message is flawed, his reasoning is flawed. I won't support him in 2016. I'm thinking of abandoning the GOP altogether. Rand Paul never had to struggle, never stood up when it would hurt his career. His filibuster was nothing more than an attention grabber, an opportunity to further his political ambitions. This man's actions have demonstrated a typical career politician's motives and nothing more.


Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

And don't, for a second, think that your views represent the majority of Ron Paul supporters, Rand Paul supporters, or the liberty movement.

If I see someone spewing stuff like this and claiming that they represent this movement, I will call them on it.

You're welcome to your opinion. But it's just yours.

dear sherri

We... are the people who represent freedom of speech, but that does not entitle you to include "we dont trust Rand" that we doesn't include me , so own your own opinions and not stick them on others. I am sure you got the distraction you were looking for like most of governments agenda , one big distraction bravo just my opinion.

Voted down 70+ votes


I am Ron Paul

Cop killings

Ok,we have cops killing people and dogs and beating them for no reason!Wait until the drones get into the air!It will be a nightmare!
Who backed Mitt the twitt instead of his own dad?The BACKSTABBER!Rand Paul,He screwed himself this week for good!

Another Obama lol now I've

Another Obama lol now I've heard it all

A nation of sheep breeds a government of wolves.

Your as full of sh-t as a

Your as full of sh-t as a Christmas turkey.
I know, I'm not responding correctely.

“It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds”
-Sam Adams

Who's not reacting correctly?

After having read your comment ( on the heart of which I agree ) and the vitriol of those who would denigrate you I feel my long, self imposed hiatus from commenting needs to be broken.
Firstly let me start by asking some straight forward, common sense questions:
1.) is the system response already in place to apprehend that " criminal " without giving our authorities any additional force to use? The answer is of course yes, and in fact they already have " overkill potential " at their disposal.
2.) is it natural for humanity, one given opportunity to abuse power at its disposals ? The answer here is yes, University study after study has proven the only thing which prevents anyone from becoming tyrannical is in a word " opportunity ".
3.) is it then wise, prudent then to say that allowing the authorities access to something as prone to misuse as drones WILL BE is a viable remedy to ANY domestic law enforcement scenario? The answer here is an emphatic NO !

What then of Rands comments? I agree with the thinking that Rand is only playing politics, and that is to his detriment with me. For is it not the playing at the body politic that has caused the overhanging consternation that by in large pervades the feelings of distrust we all have towards politicians in general?
I think Rand is less than what I would desire out of someone in whom I would follow, in that he too often makes comments or takes actions that are unconscionable to me personally. I'm thinking of how he disrespected his dad during the election specifically. I'm not a follower, and I could care less of leading either, I'm a man under the authority of God alone, for those who know me can attest to this fact. I'm neither quick to judge nor condem, I live and let live; but of my leadership I have a greater expectation to whit none have come close. There are a million mitigating factors involved, and one basicaly unknown ( to most ) reason why our politicians behave as they do, but the fact is they, and the authorities ( police, Federal, State, Local ) are not trustworthy with drone technology at their beck and call. For they WILL ABUSE it, and we shall pay the piper.

God Bless

Drew, by the very grace of GOD through the blood of Christ Jesus.
"there shall come after us men whom shall garner great wealth using our system, and having done so shall seek to slam the door of prosperity behind them." George Washington

Look buddy

do a little homework before you go running your mouf. Rand used this same exact example during the filibuster, he wasn't saying if someone robs a store send the drones, what he is saying, and you can look at the filibuster video to show it, is if someone has a gun aimed at police after robbing a store than you could constitutionally substitute a drones bullet for an officers bullet. He is imaging a firefight being ended with a drone instead of a police officers bullet. If you want to debate about that that is fine, but your premise is false, hate to break it to ya.

You just got PAULED!

But that is NOT what he said on FOX news to all the

"conservative tea party watchers" when he made his statement. He needs to be clear about drone use. Not just saying it is OK to use a drone to fire on an armed person with a gun and $50 leaving a liquor store. I did not like his use of drone statements during the filibuster either.

I had somewhat to say about it then too. So now if there is a “firefight” it is OK to use a drone air to ground missile in the United States? How does the drone operator know that the person is the robber just because he has a gun?

Can you show me a precision shot made by a drone that only does as much damage as a bullet? Are we talking about a remote control gun? Or are we talking about collateral damage…i.e. collateral damage called the constitution blown to smithereens because it is OK to kill an armed person?


please watch


You just got PAULED!

I don't like Kokesh one bit..

and I have left you a comment here: http://www.dailypaul.com/comment/3055561

And by the way, Near the end of the video, Kokesh says Ron Paul is an Anarcho Capitalist. Ron Paul is not an AnCap by his own words.

Linking Kokesh is about the worse thing you could have done to prove a point to me. The guy has 0 respect from me. Why wasn't he allowed in the Sundome in Tampa?

And he is defending Rand, Why?


I agree bear

And what bothers me about his choice of words is that it appears that he was picking up on a previous conversation when he spoke which means that he had time to think about what he was saying. It was no off the cuff remark as some believe. IMO.

Cops already get away with "justified" murder and drones will make it that much easier just like our air superiority makes it that much easier to wage war on relatively defenseless countries. When a persons life is worth less than a police dog and cops can "justifiably" kill you if they "think" you are a danger then why would anyone think drones are a good idea? What is the punishment for killing a drone I wonder?

Also when we think of drones we envision those big remote planes with missiles and such but drones can be anywhere from that to as small as an insect that delivers a poisonous sting and any combination in between. Let that sink in for a while.


Keep dreaming pal. Rand is playing politics. Obviously Ron running 3 times in a row didn't work and they are trying something different. You might not agree but I think we need to keep watching Rand and support him as of now.

two of a kind not possible

FYI there is only one Obama. Rand is on our side and thats all that matters.

How old are you? Five? Can

How old are you? Five? Can you be a little bit more unemotional? If you went on Cavuto and talked like that, people would think you were Bill O'Reilly. You did yourself a disservice here. Come back when you quit having your tantrum and can offer Rand a rational and thought out suggestion on how he could have said it better.



I stand with Rand on this one. 2016 here we come!

H E L L O ? ? ? ? ? R A N D ? ? ? ? ?

Rand said: "If someone is coming out of a liquor store with a gun and $50 dollars I don't care if a drone kills him or a policeman kills him."

Gee, hopefully the owner didn't shoot the robber and then take the money out of his hand before walking out the back door of his liquor store...

"If someone is coming out of a liquor store with a gun and $50 dollars I don't care if a drone kills him or a policeman kills him."

Gee, innocent until proven guilty???

"If someone is coming out of a liquor store with a gun and $50 dollars I don't care if a drone kills him or a policeman kills him."

Gee, the penalty for robbery is death???

"If someone is coming out of a liquor store with a gun and $50 dollars I don't care if a drone kills him or a policeman kills him."

Ummm, lawyer???? Ummm, jury of peers????

"If someone is coming out of a liquor store with a gun and $50 dollars I don't care if a drone kills him or a policeman kills him."

Sooooooooooooooo, now we have self-appointed executioners????

Go tell



Did you even listen to the filibuster? He outlined the same scenario, but in more detail. He just poorly paraphrased it in the recent interview.

Quoted from the filibuster:

"But we have a bill that we're going to come forward with that we're working on that would simply say that there has to be a - a real imminent, lethal threat, something you can see. Which then I think people could agree to that. Because it's not so much the drone that we object to. If some guy's robbing a liquor store two blocks from here and the policemen come up and he comes out brandishing a gun, he or she can be shot. They once again don't get Miranda Rights, they don't get a trial, they don't get anything. If you come out brandishing a weapon and people are threatened by it, you can be shot."

Yes, I heard the filebuster and that was the part I DID NOT LIKE

then and I DON'T LIKE IT NOW.

Um the robber can drop the gun when he sees police, he cannot drop the gun when a drone fires upon him.

What ever happened to "Drop your weapon and put your hands up?"

Now it is see a gun and shoot? How do you know it isn't the owner of the store?

No, I will not be silent on this. I am not over reacting.

What about the gals in the blue truck that got shot up during Dorner chase? What if drone had been used on them? Did you see the back of their truck?

So now we sending air to ground missiles to take out armed robbers....and the rest of the people shoppers in the area?

Shattered windows, glass shard and shrapnel. Because someone is robbing a liquer store?

How am I over reacting? I'd like to know.


when he says

"with a gun" he is implying a firefight, like threatening people, what would be wrong with holding 50 dollars, your logic is silly. I bet you have a hard time getting across to people who disagree with you. you guys need to just relax, big government is not going to take over the world, they can't even take your AK's, I have my own problems with Rand but I give him a 9 1/2 out of 10, it's all about perspective, I will defend this guy till I die because I know there's only about 4 other senators that really see eye to eye with that guy and if we want him to drive Ron's game plan home we don't need to be just talking crap like it is nothing and he doesn't fight for us. If he becomes pres. you will be eating your words and regretting it as well.

You just got PAULED!

What? Are you threatening me?

You said: "If he becomes pres. you will be eating your words and regretting it as well."

What do you mean I will be regretting it? Will he be sending a drone to my house because I dared to say that I do not agree with his statements on FOX NEWS for all the conservative people to hear that "He doesn't care if a person leaving a liquor store with a gun and $50 is killed by a drone or a policeman."

He did not say anything about a firefight. He needs to be careful with his words. "He doesn't care if a person is killed." I don't care if it is a firefight or not. I care if a person is killed.

His words were careless and if he does not mean what he says, then what does he mean. He needs Adam Kokesh to speak for him?

And by the way, I have very little respect for Adam Kokesh, so the whole idea that he of all people is defending Rand after he was, from what I understood, not allowed to attend Ron Paul's rally at the sun dome. And then he dares to call Ron Paul an AnarchoCapitalist. Ron Paul is not an AnarchoCapitalist. He said so himself.

Something does not sit right with this whole thing as far as I am concerned and I am not a stupid idiot with silly logic.

What Rand needs to do is get on public television and CLARIFY his statement himself...if indeed HE CARES if someone is killed.

My problem is not with the drone as the weapon of choice it is with the whole idea that someone with a gun and $50 bucks coming out of a liquor store is a target to kill. PERIOD.

If there is a firefight, then RAND NEEDS TO SAY THOSE WORDS.

And then Kokesh has the audacity to show the blue truck in the Dorner chase? As if drones were used, then that wouldn't of happened? Well, if drones were used I would imagine the 2 women would be dead today because those cops would have called in the drones instead of doing the shooting themselves.

And by the way, I want to support Rand.


deacon's picture

how is this over reacting?

you dared to question rand
everyone knows he is above reproach,and should never be questioned
same thing will happen if you question the AJ,or ask one of his supporters a question
this be hallowed ground to them :)
i asked a question last night about rands intent,a question that didn't get answered,just down voted into oblivion

Leave an indelible mark on all of those that you meet.
OH... have fun day :)

I don't like it, not one bit and I want to Stand with Rand

But, Granger says she agrees with Judge Nap and I haven't listened to him yet. I am out of the house on my hot spot and my it is too slow to watch the video. At least I have a mobile hot spot though! Thanks to my husband and my birthday. This is its first trial run :)

deacon's picture

I like rand myself

but if i can question myself,i certainly have the ability
to question the intent and or integrity of others
i did not like how he stated his position,and put it out there
and because i dared to question rand,i irritated his faithful
rand is going to need a Chrystalectomy shortly
this is a medical procedure where they insert a glass eye into your
belly button,so others can see out :)

Leave an indelible mark on all of those that you meet.
OH... have fun day :)