-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!

http://sherriequestioningall.blogspot.com/



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

Why drones should only be used with court approval

We do not need this gigantic police force from the federal government. we had martial law up there, fbi and all these agents coming in and closing things down going into peoples houses, no technology is fine but it has to be guarded and if there is a question you guard liberty before you say well if we catch a bad guy that is good. You do not give up liberty for 9 people because you might find one person. So I would be very cautious about that. The federal goverment is not supposed to be our police force yet we have over 100 thousand federal officals who carry guns to enforce these laws and they own boston. It is criminal that people tolerated this so much that we tolerated this martial law and total acceptance that they can come into our houses that we can not even go out of the house. You know what if we wanted to go to the store and go buy a loaf of bread. No you cant do that. It was serious. It was a crisis. There was 3 people killed. We have 48 murders every single day. There is a lot of murders out there. Do we close down cities because there is 10 murders over the weekend in Chicago. We dont do that. Here we closed down a whole city, not even allowed to go to a baseball game: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ZcLGO...!

jhon

Why we do not need more surveillance cameras

American citizens do not need to be supervised going about their daily business like prison inmates, who are naturally suspected of malevolent intentions.

Cameras don’t make things simply more sophisticated; they make permanent records. Your neighbor monitoring his own private property, or a corporation doing the same, is not akin to government officials reconnoitering large public areas looking for anybody who might come off as “odd.”

Having more cameras on our streets aren’t going to keep us safe from or help to “stay ahead” of terrorists. A suicide bomber is not going to care whether or not he is caught on camera blowing himself up. Actually, the idea of a permanent recording capturing what he views as an act of self-martyrdom might just tickle his fancy.

What expanded surveillance will do is put Americans more at risk of being harassed and abused by petty government bureaucrats – police, prosecutors and other revenue collectors of all varieties. After all, once the cameras are installed, why not maximize their utility by looking for drug and prostitution activity, speeding or traffic violations, etc.?

What Rep. King needs to realize is that the “war on terror” is a metaphorical war that is a poor framework for dealing with the terrorism that afflicts Americans as a result of their government’s invasive and destructive actions abroad. It is war with no end, because terrorism is a tactic, not our actual enemy.

jhon

SteveMT's picture

What you are saying is slanderous.

You are throwing the word treason around incorrectly with abandon.
Treason: the offense of acting to overthrow one's government or to harm or kill its sovereign.

I agree and this type of

I agree and this type of mis-used hyperbole and drama queen antics make the liberty movement unappealing. Everything one dislikes isn't "treason".

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

HOW DARE YOU SAY

HOW DARE YOU SAY THAT!
TREEEAAAAASON!

You have a self-fulfilling prophesy

To hate Rand. Every minor mistake and misspoken word you blow it all out of proportion.

It's ok, there can be others besides Ron Paul. Ron is old and retired now, try to see that Rand is awesome too. Don't try to dissect every imperfection.

Also, dumb title. Another Obama, really??

I am Ron Paul

more than just taking out bad guy

I listened to the first part of the Cavuto interview. Rand's reasoning is pretty confused. He is saying that if there is a violent criminal around he has no problem with police using heat-seeking technology that can peer into peoples homes or surveillance drones. Is he okay with police pointing rifles at people having the temerity to look at them form a window? And like many Americans, he cannot admit that law enforcement officers do lie whether to get a conviction or cover their butts. Remember we are on their terrorist lists already.

Vickie

Just Clone Ron Paul

If we clone Ron, then everyone will be happy. Till then....

if the guy is coming out of

if the guy is coming out of the liquor store waving a .45 around, what do you think should happen? I understand we all want due process and 'innocent till proven guilty'...but come on.

For all of us who carry concealed, this is a real life scenario that any of us could encounter at some point. If put in that situation, I hope I never get it wrong...but I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

“Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it’s realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy.”
― Ron Paul

Exactly

Self defense is common sense. If a psycopath with a weapon is threatening anyone at all and about to harm someone. What difference does the tool they use in self defense make?

This is the same bullshit line of thinking that goes along with gun banners. Drone banners are next i guess. Though regular people should definitely be able to own drones.

edit:
Within the confines of the Constitution of course on bothe sides.

"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty."

Click Here To See The Candidates On The Record

No matter what they do, it's never good enough

When Ron Paul was running for president, there were countless posts on how poorly he phrased things in some debate, or how he should have said this or that during some interview. Yes, Rand's 10 second statement was phrased poorly and he failed to specifically define this hypothetical crime scene, but he clearly framed his point of view on drone use during his 1/2 day filibuster.

If you disagree with something Rand says, great. Please say so. Most DP members are probably eager to challenge and refine their stances, but it never goes like that. Instead it's "he's a traitor" or "he's a Mitt lover" or "he's an establishment hack" or "he's showing his true neo-con beliefs." Ron Paul has been able to reach those who were looking. Now, Rand is taking part in the difficult task of reaching those who aren't. I'm sorry, but in case you haven't gotten the message, he can't do that by being his father.

Campaign for Liberty, Young Americans for Liberty, Institute for Peace and Prosperity, National Association for Gun Rights. These are organizations through which Ron Paul continues his work and more effectively connects with people of different backgrounds and interests. Likewise, Ron Paul's work continues through the people he has influenced in the Congress, including his son.

Why give the people who want to silence us more ammunition to do it? The tide is turning. Attitudes are changing. People who will forever refuse to support Ron Paul are now backing Ron Paul's message, his organizations and even his son. The argument can almost be made that there's more support for Ron Paul "out there" than you can find right here. I don't get it.

Michael Nystrom's picture

Oh BROTHER!

While I do not completely trust Rand, nor have I taken the unwavering wedding vow that some here have to "Stand With Rand," this post represents the worst of the Daily Paul.

Do you think you could try to conduct yourself with a little more decorum?

He's the man.

Wedding? Really??? Maybe it's an orgy???????

Who has a better opportunity to lead the USA to liberty?

It's not that I'm wedded to the GOP.. you know what gets me.. wedding to me is part of spiritual life, and politics is not. I can see where things like "loyalty oaths" are like "vows", but there is no holy communion.

The GOP is changing and it's a wonderful thing to see and be part of.

Michael Nystrom's picture

Granger, you know I love you

But what is the difference between being wed and a "loyalty oath?"

Both are based on the same spiritual principles: Your word, loyalty, blind faith and love.

Politics is not part of spiritual life - that much is apparent. But that is the problem. It should be. Because it is devoid of spirituality, it is 'everything goes:' Lie when it suits you, (I don't mean you - I'm sure you practice a form of spiritual politics, even though you deny it), do anything and everything to achieve power. The ends always justify the means in politics precisely because it is devoid of spirituality.

Who has a better opportunity to lead the USA to liberty?

Who knows? No one can see the future. Even Darth Vader started out as a Jedi. Even Yoda was fooled.

I reserve my loyalty oaths to God and to my wife. Certainly not to any soulless political organization.

:-)

He's the man.

((((((MN)))))))

Being wed is a sacrament.. for better or worse, in sickness and in health.. it's between two people (and who they let into their marriage, in laws, children, pets, friends become family).

Politics, it's not about better or worse, it's about having an agenda and advancing that agenda in the form of force (defense/offense) and in this case, Ron Paul rEVOLution >Liberty movement w/i the GOP, Rand stepping up to take the leadership. So I'm in. To me, there is nothing spiritual about government unless it is a theocracy. What is spirirtual about comunism?

On our case it's about taking power to restore the republic to constitional government/ bill of rights, smaller government. I think RP said at one time about being appointed to lead the EPA so he could close the EPA.

Rand in national level for most of us, we still have state and county leaderships to consider, and while Rand can not win them all, because he's working to advance, we can still work on state and local levels.

The loyalty oaths to the parties are definately one thing I would love to see the rEVOLution in the GOP bring a resolution to the states that have them, using the precedent of the states that don't have them anymore. That's how I had hoped we would be working together on DP with the state to state connections, so we could help each other. :))

I'm not really a big fan of his, BUT

he is nothing like Obama, yet at the same time I don't think he is 1/4 the statesman his father is!

Proud to say

I stand with Rand.

LL on Twitter: http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
sometimes LL can suck & sometimes LL rocks!
http://www.dailypaul.com/203008/south-carolina-battle-of-cow...
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

I'm curious why you don't

I'm curious why you don't stand with Gary Johnson LL?

"It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere".
--Voltaire

It's hard not to be a menace to society when half the population is happy on their knees. - unknown

matter of fact...

I do stand with GJ and all liberty candidates supporting their future campaigns for House Senate Governor etc.

LL on Twitter: http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
sometimes LL can suck & sometimes LL rocks!
http://www.dailypaul.com/203008/south-carolina-battle-of-cow...
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

Fair enough. Is it that you

Fair enough. Is it that you think Rand has a better chance of winning, or you think he's better period?

"It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere".
--Voltaire

It's hard not to be a menace to society when half the population is happy on their knees. - unknown

Just curious...

Will you "stand with Rand", no matter what? Is he infallible? Wasn't Ron Paul right when he said, it's not about the man, it's about the message? If Rand Paul has the wrong message, shouldn't we point out to him that he's strayed?

It matters what.. so what is what?

Is there someone else in the GOP you would prefer than Rand? If you are part of the liberty movement within the GOP then Rand is the man to be standing with. Please name anyone else if you disagree.

Ron Paul gave us a message, to restore the republic, and that is what Rand is doing, and doing it with a GOP that we all know is corrupt. We are changing that GOP and that is very cool.

Rand's message is Ron's message, the difference being, Rand is GOP, and so if your're not GOP, then maybe you will find another republican like GJ, slap a LP sticker on him and campaign for GJ 16.

For those of us in the GOP, Rand is the man, and for some who are not in the GOP, but see and understand the efforts of us who are, Rand is also the man to stand with at this time. Maybe those who are not part of the GOP will change. maybe if Ben Carson, or Ben Swan runs for president.. that's where they will go.. and that's fine by me.

No...

No, no there isn't anyone I like better. But I'm pretty disappointed with Rand. Every day he's starting to act more like a typical politician. I'm not trying to be rude, but your post made no sense. The difference between Rand and his dad is that Rand is GOP? Ron Paul was GOP too. He was a Republican for most of his life! Wtf are you talking about? The difference between Rand and his father is that his father said what he meant, and stood by it... and Rand is pandering to the neoconservative wing of the Republican party. Look at who's behind his campaign that's all you need to know.

His father established a goal

and his son is being the quaterback.. it takes a team and we all have our roles, or not (with excuses).

Targets should be worse politicians

When chickens show a spot of blood, other chickens peck at it until it dies. We should stop acting like fourteen year old girls that spot a zit in the mirror. There are probably at least 97 Senators with worse records than Rand Paul. Until they are first replaced, I'm not going to jump on the anti-Rand bandwagon of neo-cons and Democrats who want to eliminate him politically as a future threat.

Nobody is perfect except the Creator

I'm looking forward to Rand's administration with his dad as Sec. of Treasury (or chairman of the Fed -- to end it) Judge Nap as SCOTUS etc.

LL on Twitter: http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
sometimes LL can suck & sometimes LL rocks!
http://www.dailypaul.com/203008/south-carolina-battle-of-cow...
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

Right after the fillibuster

Rand stated that he supports the use of drones on enemy combatants and imminent threats. If someone has a weapon and has just robbed a store, the police may kill that person without a warrant if they believe that there is a likelihood of them using their weapon. So what difference does it make if a drone kills the robber if the police were going to use that force anyway? I think (emphasis on think), that the situation Rand was talking about was one where people were in immediate danger.

Immediate danger, Will Robinson

Immediate danger ... like when SWAT teams herded Bostonians out of their homes during their hunt for their FBI-informant patsy? Americans are in immediate danger of losing all of our rights. Why aren't Rand's drones saving us?

You, sir, are an imment threat to the security

of the sand around my head. Drone 'em, Danno!

Love or fear? Choose again with every breath.