Comment: There have been a few

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: So like I said, you weigh (see in situ)

There have been a few

There have been a few interviews where Ron and Rand say there only big disagreement is with sanctions being an act of war. Rand is in the minority with that opinion here at the DP.

But sanctions is where the buck stops with Rand, and not going by rhetoric but his record -- which proves that statement. Last year when the Senate voted to give Obama permission to stop Iran by "any means necessary", Rand was the only nay -- 98-1. And while foreign aid continues to Israel and other countries, Rand's the only Senator really putting in effort to stop it.

If you or anyone throws Rand in the dumpster over rhetoric he's using to keep the GOP base behind him, I think that's ridiculous. Now I think it's perfectly reasonable to doubt him, be skeptical of him, be pretty pessimistic about him. My only grief is with the people that are viciously criticizing him, and it's only because his name is Rand Paul and is being held to a different standard than all the other Liberty candidates out there. If Rand were to say military force for humanitarian reasons are okay, and would support invading Uganda to kill Kony, he would be getting just as much flak as he is right now for the Israel comments. And the kicker is, there was a Liberty candidate that said that. There is a pretty biased standard with Rand, and it's ridiculous.