8 votes

Rand Paul isn’t his father’s son when it comes to drug legalization


The younger Paul has long distanced himself from his father’s pro-legalization stances. While campaigning for his father, Rand defended the states-rights positions, but he has since made a point to note that he does not personally favor the legalization of drugs such as heroin and cocaine. He spent much of last year assuring conservatives -- who will be crucial in Iowa, New Hampshire and much of the heartland in 2016 -- that, when it came to drugs, he was on their side.

But much of the Paul brand is built on the backs of the Libertarian-leaning voters who buoyed his father’s presidential bids, and Paul’s refusals in the past to voice support for state-level legalization has earned him some chiding from them. He has, however, charted out a fairly libertarian -- some might even argue, liberal -- position on drug sentencing reform, calling for the walk-back of federal mandatory minimum sentences for nonviolent drug offenses.

As 2016 inches closer, Paul may find himself increasingly tugged in two directions. Thus far, Paul has toed the line -- supporting sentencing reform that is considered by many essential to undoing the societal damage done by the war on drugs while deliberately staying far away from his father’s states’ rights crusades with regard to drugs.

Here's a more detailed look at Rand Paul on sentencing reform and legalization.


Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

Drug legalization is and always should be a 10th amendment issue

Same as abortion, same sex marriage etc.

Federal government should not be pushing laws like this, it should be determined by state privilege..

When the King of England recognized the 13 states independence from the crown, he recognized 13 independent nations, not THE UNITED STATES as a nation. The United States Government has limited enumerated powers. The states and the people have the power if they will claim it.


"Take hold of the future or the future will take hold of you." -- Patrick Dixon

Pro (ALL) drug legalization

Pro (ALL) drug legalization is just not a popular position. Even though it's wrong to have these laws in the books, society has been indoctrinated to endorse these ideas, and nothing is changing anytime soon

Rand isn't like his dad on so

Rand isn't like his dad on so many issues and I have about lost all enthusiasm for him if I ever had any..

If you disagree with me on anything you are not a real libertarian...

I don't buy the "playing

I don't buy the "playing politics" excuse like a lot of the Rand supporters do. What I've noticed is that Rand is very careful in the way he answers questions. He's careful not to get caught in a gotcha moment and give them ammo. If there are any questions as to where he stands, all one has to do is look at his voting record. Rand votes in line with the Constitution. That is all that matters.

Every informed voter has to

Every informed voter has to face a "lesser of two evils" kind of decision. All men are fallible. Our job needs to be convincing the people on the fence about the positives our guy possesses. If Rand is the best chance we have then let's push "all-in".

Listen to yourself

The same exact mentality that has caused this nightmare. We must choose evil?!?

No we don't have to choose anything. We can let the entire concept melt into oblivion. There is absolutely no requirement to play that insane game of choosing evil.

Those of you who play that game will be responsible for the destruction of peace you endorsed and made happen just like you are responsible for funding and building this nightmare of tyranny we now face.

For those of you who participate YOU are responsible for what that system does. Don't forget that.

The most powerful Law of Nature is Time. It is finite and we all will run out of it. Use this Law to your advantage, for it offers you infinite possibilities...

Then what should I do?

What are you going to do? This "system" is all I/we know. Are we supposed to fight to bring it all down? What if Rand wins the nomination? I just don't see any "new" angles or "good" choices here.

Bring justice to criminals

When someone intentionally harms another it is a crime. It doesn't matter who they claim they are because we are all equal. Anyone claiming they can lawfully do something that harms you is lying. It doesn't matter if they are a cop, judge, prosecutor, neighbor, teacher, child whomever. Each is liable for their own actions and them claiming some power over you is simply a LIE. The only time they have any lawful power to take any of your time is when a member of the governed has explicitly requested there services. That means for ANYTHING. That is real law and it is real simply. They must act impartially on behalf of the governed accusations against you for them to be operating lawfully. You don't need politics to maintain your freedom you need the protections of law.

Stop contracting with them in all forms. If they try to force you into contract they are committing felony extortion and you can seek justice for remedy from there injury. If the law is upheld then politics does not matter because the legislature only has the power to regulate themselves and commerce and the representatives are only suppose to re-present what their constituents have presented to them. Representatives are not lawful operators if they are not re-presenting what has been presented to them. If a delegate body does not present instructions to the representative on what to do then they are suppose to abstain. If they act on their own then they are not representing and any act they do under such scenario is not lawful anyway.

So the only thing any of us need to do uphold the law. Politics was never designed to be such a burden on our lives. It is criminals who falsely believe they have power to do what ever they want who have caused the injury upon all of us. Learn law and seek justice for those who injure you. We the People are the boss in all lawful scenarios. They have unlawfully usurped power that does not rightfully belong to them. This all happened because we ignored the law. Learn and master the real law and don't let anyone push you around ever again.

The most powerful Law of Nature is Time. It is finite and we all will run out of it. Use this Law to your advantage, for it offers you infinite possibilities...

If I am choosing the lesser

If I am choosing the lesser of 3 evils, I am going with Jesse Ventura. Maybe my vote won't count, but that just means you guys get to pick our tyrant for the next 4 years. May our chains rest lightly upon us.

If I get a choice

If I get a choice between Jesse and Rand it will absolutely be Jesse!

Pen to Paper.

You might have it brother. The only thing that win's this is a massive write -in campaign in the vein of "None of the Above". If the people want to speak let them speak with their pen's in hand. How much longer will we be allowed to put pen to paper?

Jesse has endorsed the Draft,

Jesse has endorsed the Draft, he claims it will stop the wars. In the past, he wanted Michael Bloomberg to run for President. And he wants Howard Stern to be his running mate in 2016. He bashes the Tea Party movement, and calls them "teabaggers"

Jesse is a nice guy, but he does not understand the Constitution. Rand actually does understand the Constitution, and his voting record shows that. If you bother to actually look in to it.

Yes, he has endorsed the

Yes, he has endorsed the draft, and he has also endorsed closing all foreign military bases, and not using military force anywhere past 500 miles of our borders.

I understand that a draft would be coercive, but I also understand his point that people without children that could be killed in war, are more inclined to support war because they do not have any skin in the game. College students were not upset about the Vietnam war because it was wrong, as much as they didn't want themselves to be sent off to a jungle to die.

If there was a draft to go to Iraq, would there have been more opposition to that war? As one of the small number of vets that was sent off to fight that war, I could see the indifference when I came back. I still see it in the under funding at the VA hospital, and the reluctance of businesses to hire vets because their mental stability is in question. For the record, it was unjust, and I have a lot of shame over my part now that I am wiser to the ways of the world.

Let the down votes commence, but I do support mandatory conscription. Only if it were up to me, they would be conscripting people in their 30's, not 18 year old CHILDREN. I believe this would effectively end wars of aggression. I know I will now hear about how un-libertarian that statement is, but I don't care, sometimes ideology and pragmatism are in conflict.

How is calling a tea party person a tea bagger any different than calling a liberal a commie? It is just name calling by people who want things to go their way, and believe in the exceptionalism of their views.

As far as Ventura's views in the past, all of us his positions are constantly evolving based on personal experience. He used to not question 911 at all, but that changed. I wouldn't accuse him of being a shill for the official story because at one point he believed it. So did I at one point. There are a lot of things I used to believe, but I never came from a place of enjoying evilness or anything like that.

Ventura is a good guy, and that is a great starting point. That is the same reason I liked Ron Paul, I could tell he was a good man. Rand Paul on the other hand, I do not instinctually trust. I go with my gut more than I do voting records. That doesn't mean my opinion of Rand couldn't change in the future, but right now it is what it is.

There's no such thing as 18

There's no such thing as 18 year old children. Most people grow up long before that.

If you want to try and prevent wars of aggression, why not make it a requirement for all politicians who vote for a war to serve on its front lines?

Why not have the presidents who start illegal wars lead their troops into battle?

Draft father and son Ventura, John B. Wells, and everyone else who supports a draft.

And I know people who wanted to go to Iraq and did. Let them and the above go, and leave the rest who want nothing to do with it alone.

Seth, how many wars did the

Seth, how many wars did the draft help end/keep us out of? The War Between the States? WWI? WWII? Vietnam?
Also, from a Christian perspective. The Bible is very clear about the draft in the Old Testement. Men who were engaged to be married, or had a new wife for less than a year were told NOT to fight. Also, anyone who was afraid was told not to fight, in other words. There was no conscription. Victory comes from God.

I realize that being in the military messed up your life, and that is terrible. But you did join out of your own free will. With all due respect, whoever implements a draft will have blood on their hands. I really don't feel like dying in Iraq until America wakes up.

"How is calling a tea party person a tea bagger any different than calling a liberal a commie?"
Calling a liberal a commie is accurate because he does support most of the 10 planks of the Communist Manifesto. Lots of so called Conservatives support some of them as well. "tea bagger" is a messed up sexual slur used on the tea party, the term was around before the tea party. Alex Jones and Mancow Mueller brought it to my attention.

You make a good historical

You make a good historical point about the draft not keeping us out of wars in the past. I would say that opposition to the draft helped to shift public opinion and end the Vietnam war earlier. Televising scenes from those protests, and the war, helped to spread those ideas. Television was previously not a factor.

I would also point out that drafts have always included exemptions for those in higher social classes, classes with more influence in ending wars. College exemptions for Nam, and hiring someone to take your place in the civil war. A draft would have to do away with those.

I don't think comparing modern wars is a fair comparison with the presence of so much information at hand via the internet. I also think that a 30 year old with some life experience is less controllable than an ignorant 18 year old, on average. I know you don't want to go to Iraq, that is why you would make a great protester if they tried to draft you. Your ass would be on the line, it is great motivation. That is the point entirely.

As someone that prays to Christ, and half believes the bible, I don't believe in offensive wars, or that we should separate ourselves into tribes called nations. The military did not mess up my life btw, it was a large part in bringing me to God from my previous arrogant atheist belief system. Because of my coming to God I have a happy marriage with a very sweet woman, that is smoking hot, and a handsome, healthy, and intelligent 4 year old boy. None of the things I value would be in my life if I hadn't gone down the path that I had. I am far more empathetic than the average person because of my military experiences, as well as more willing to fight for a cause worth believing in. Intellectually or physically in self defense, if need be.

Back to the reason I would draft 30 year olds, partially because a 40 year old is getting a little too broken down physically, but also because a 30 year old has some real world knowledge. Yes an 18 year old is joining the military of their own free will, but does that really mean they know what they are doing? I could give a rat poison laced cookie to a 6 year old and tell them it had rat poison. Then they would eat it and I could blame it on their free will. Making a choice and understanding a choice are not the same thing. We don't trust an 18 year old to buy beer, but we trust them to sign their life away in more ways than the military.

I knew what tea bagging was long before it was being applied to a political group. Words only hurt if you empower them to hurt you. If you are proud of your group, a disparaging term shouldn't matter much. So someone calls your group a name and you all huddle up and call their group a name, that is how wars start.

My whole point in life is to

My whole point in life is to keep my son...our kids alive. I would never support someone who supports a draft. Never.

I have a 4 year old boy

I have a 4 year old boy myself, he is sitting right next to me now. If there is a draft for an unjust war, I would encourage him to refuse to go, regardless the consequences. A draft for wars would create a social pressure that would cause backlash against the war mongers. Especially if there are no draft loopholes for our "social betters".

Realistically speaking, there will be no end to wars, it would defy human nature for man to live in peace.

You want to keep your kid alive so you oppose a draft, but by being glad your child is not the sacrifice, you will not fight as hard to keep someone else from being that sacrifice. Not just on our side where they "volunteer" out of limited life options, but also the brown people that have to die when we attack them.

But anyways, there is a better chance of the sun not rising tomorrow than humans giving up war.

Thank you! All these people

Thank you! All these people claiming that Rand lies or that they don't know where he stands.

Spell it out.


If you want to know where he stands...go look at what he's doing in Washington. He is always in line with the Constitution.

You would vote for JV over

You would vote for JV over Rand? Do you even understand JVs positions? You do know he sits to the far left on a lot of things. And he sucks at economics.

Yes I would vote for Jesse

Yes I would vote for Jesse over Rand. I understand his positions pretty well. His support of abortion is the things that most concerns me.

Are civil liberties a left vs. right issue? You are engaging in a false paradigm. Either it is liberty vs. tyranny or is its left vs. right. If it is left vs. right then civil liberties belong to the left and you are bashing civil liberties? The right wants to throw people in jail for smoking weed. Perhaps you should refer to the right as a dirty thing.

Jesse can learn economics, he is smart and open minded. He is not without flaws just like you and I.


i would rather vote for Ventura or Johnson than Rand since both of them are on the same page on foreign policy: bring the troops home and stop foreign entanglements. I don't hear that from Rand, only that he'd like "a little less aggressive foreign policy" what does that mean? Somewhat fewer drone murders? There are other reasons too, but that is a big one for me.

You live in Minnesota, right?

I have followed him for a while, I agree with you. Can you share any particular insight into how he was as a Governor?

I was only 18 or 19 when he

I was only 18 or 19 when he was elected. I liked him then because he was seemed down to earth and spoke on behalf of the pissed off people. I didn't like the government at 18 but I'm not sure I understood...as I do know...why.

My insight from what I understood as a young lady is that he did what he said he was going to do. Only he wasn't always sharp on what should be done.

Part of being a good leader is knowing what to do.

I read one of his books

'Do I stand alone?' it was published in 2000.
I know he has changed some since then. His views were mixed, some good, some bad. But he bought into a lot of propaganda. He did not understand the 2nd amendment and a lot of other important things. He seemed to care more about being "Independent" than real issues.

I guess I should read it again some time soon.

egapele's picture

The drug issue & Rand is a potent weapon for Hillary & Jeb

I'm glad he's sticking with the social conservatives on this.

Great insurance for when (not if) either Camp Clinton or Camp Bush bring up the whole aqua buddha thing.

Hmmm... Clinton =


Clinton = Benghazi
Paul = Aqua Buddha

Who will the people choose?

"those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it"

"The same happened with Alcohol Prohibition (1920-1933). Prohibition had only a minimal effect on the desire of Americans to drink (in some cases, it clearly made drinking more attractive), but pushing alcohol underground had other effects: overdose deaths, gang violence, and other prohibition-related harms increased dramatically during the Prohibition years."
-Gary Johnson

Or maybe

Rand is just playing his cards a little closer to his chest than his father.

There are a lot of conservatives who are just not quite ready for talk of legalization, but who would otherwise support Rand, and he doesn't want to turn these people off. He seems to take great care not to say anything too extreme, but that doesn't mean he's not with us. When the people are ready, I think we may see an adjustment in his position.

Like the Godfather said, "Never tell anybody outside the family what you're thinking..."


You mean deception might be useful in politics?



...it's funny how people see establishment politicians misrepresenting themselves for evil purposes all the time, but just cannot wrap their heads around a libertarian politician misrepresenting himself for good purposes.

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