Guest Post: The Trouble with Rand Paul

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by John Aziz of Azizonomics,

Rand Paul just endorsed a man who is deeply hostile to human liberty.

Perhaps that’s Rand’s idea of playing politics? Come to the table, strike a deal, get what you can. Trouble is, it’s tough striking a good deal when the guy on the other side of the table believes that the government should be allowed to claim — without having to produce any evidence whatsoever — that certain people are terrorists, and therefore should be detained indefinitely without any kind of due process.

That’s textbook tyranny.

Yes, I would have [signed the NDAA]. And I do believe that it is appropriate to have in our nation the capacity to detain people who are threats to this country, who are members of al Qaeda. Look, you have every right in this country to protest and to express your views on a wide range of issues but you don’t have a right to join a group that has killed Americans, and has declared war against America. That’s treason. In this country we have a right to take those people and put them in jail. If I were president I would not abuse this power. But people who join al Qaeda are not entitled to rights of due process under our normal legal code. They are entitled instead to be treated as enemy combatants.

 

Mitt Romney

Except, if the government had any evidence they were really members of al-Qaeda and engaged in a war against America they could be charged with offenses under current laws and tried in front of a jury of their peers. As was proven when Judge Katherine Forrest struck down the indefinite detention provision of the NDAA as unconstitutional, the real detention targets are people like the ones who brought the case — writers, investigative journalist and whistleblowers: people like Chris Hedges, Noam Chomsky, Daniel Ellsberg, Jennifer Bolen, and Birgitta Jonsdottir.

Rand Paul might have done some good work trying to filibuster the Patriot Act, but endorsing Mitt Romney goes beyond the pale. The NDAA is Romney’s most egregious transgression against liberty, but not far behind are his desire to start a war against Iran, to increase military spending, to start a trade war with China and his belief that corporations are people.

I know I will never agree with any politician on every single dimension of every single issue, and that to some extent politics will always involve compromise. Certainly, I disagree with Ron Paul on some issues. But Mitt Romney’s stances on these issues seem much, much, much closer to Barack Obama than they do to Ron Paul. In fact, he might as well have endorsed Obama for President.

And the Ron Paul supporters are noticing: Rand has probably burnt most bridges to his Father’s supporters now. His Facebook page has seen a huge outpouring of fury:

Just lost a lot of faith in a man I otherwise adored.

You suck Rand! Traitor!

That’s why this country is doomed! Even the person you trust is a sell-out. I’m done with politics, people deserve what they get. Let the country run itself to the ground, and still people will not understand what freedom and self-responsibility is about. People want big gov’t, big brother every step of the way. Well, they got it. The rest of us, might as well try to move to another country or find an island and move there.

I knew I’d never vote for Mitt… Now I know I’ll never vote for Rand.

He has fully sold out to the bankers

Endorsing Romney is tantamount to an utter sell-out of conservative principles.

Did George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison try to compromise with King George? Or — when it became obvious that they were facing tyranny — did they stand up for the principles of liberty?

I have always been uncomfortable with the children of politicians becoming politicians. Every anointed child feels like a step away from meritocracy. Dynasties are dangerous, because the dynasty itself comes to be more important than the qualities of the politicians. Who would Rand Paul be if he wasn’t Ron Paul’s son? Just another neocon. Neocons often have a few “unfashionable” libertarian or constitutionalist sympathies; look at Charles Krauthammer. But — unlike Ron Paul — the neocon never has the spine to do much about their libertarian or constitutionalist sympathies. They just ride on the establishment steamroller, into foreign occupations, empire building, corporate welfare, and banking bailouts. Into Iraq, and soon into Iran.

Rand Paul just got on the steamroller.

Comment viewing options

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

For God's sake.

The interstate system transformed our country and enabled private commerce to a degree never before imagined.  And the property owners who had to give up a few yards of land were richly rewarded.

Go fucking learn some fucking history.

And think about this.....  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GD0xgD9f5Fk

 

Clashfan's picture

I have to wonder if either one of you, nmewn or LTER, believe that 911 was an inside job. Because if you don't, both systems have failed to give you proper critical thinking skills.

But I can give you that history lesson if that's the case.

LetThemEatRand's picture

Tell all the down vote fuckers to go fuck themselves.

9.11 was an inside job.The evidence is overwhelming.  

Zionist Jew's picture

9/11 Inside Job???

Nonsense!  On this 45th anniversary of the glorious Israeli assault on the USS Liberty, let us not marginalize Mossad and their most daring clandestine operation in history.

 

Long Live Israel Bitchez!

prole's picture

I'll let the Liberty thing go if you'll take out this LTER fucker

LetThemEatRand's picture

Sorry fucking homeland security.

Bitch.

prole's picture

This isn't an argument. I am laughing at vermin. Squealing scurrying vermin

barkingbill's picture

yeah if you can't win an argument, just kill the person making it. LOL. and again...you believe in free what? markets was that? 

CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

 

9.11 was an inside job.The evidence is overwhelming. 

 

So you believe that your beloved government used redistrubted wealth to kill thousands of your fellow Americans and yet you demand that the government be given even more money and power? That's true genius.

LetThemEatRand's picture

You have no fucking idea what I believe, but keep with the simple.  It suits you.

CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

The fact that I don't know what you believe and you don't know what I believe is why freedom is necessary to the health and well being of the individual human animal. Your grand system of central planning only works if the regulators can know all the intimate details of the lives of millions of individuals which, of course, they can't.

Clashfan's picture

Thank you LTER. I will now be much more patient with you (though I have already been trying). I can see that you are a rational person. Please remember this sincere recognition upon our next spat (which I'm sure will eventualize).

This is my litmus test (or at least the most important one). I think it's the best measuring stick, currently, regarding whether or not I should continue to interact with someone.

Benjamin Glutton's picture

my litmus test includes recognizing the financial disaster as an inside job as well.

 

blaming sub-prime lending for the crisis is like blaming the Wright Brothers for 9/11.

Bringin It's picture

Clashfan - notice nmewn disappeared.  For the record, nmewn is here to claim to be a true believer in the official conspiracy story, including that 2 planes brought down 3 buildings, there were no controlled demolitions, etc.

I'm not sure he's the original nmewn.  Go back and look.  The original nmewn was much more of a block-head.

Clashfan's picture

TY, Bringing It. I'll take your word for it.

Cool SN, btw.

nmewn's picture

"notice nmewn disappeared"

Fucking troll, I shot off some fireworks, had a snack and went to bed if you must know...and you have the distinction of being my first personal troll. But at least you've learned to spell my name right over time.

Now you are here to get me involved in another 911 debate because you have a few idiots here in the comments to down arrow me (as if I care) who believe the truther shit of Tarpley (Geopol), GW's yellow jounalism and the rest of the unproven, speculatory bilge spewed about.

Because it's impossible for you to reconcile in your mind all the evidence that points to something other than what you believe...it must be some well coordinated, detailed, intricate conspiracy involving hundreds if not thousands of moving parts, timelines, government employees and communiques.

How do you reconcile Todd Beamer and his flight? How do you reconcile amatuer pilots, flying jumbo jets, hitting precisely where demolition charges were pre-planted, survived impact, then detonated?

So you are left clutching at the two planes-three buildings meme...whatever, hold it tight to your breast.

The only conspiracy here is the cover up of the gross incompetence of those federal employees (Jamie Gorelick chief among them), who can't seem to balance a simple checkbook yet are mastermind Dr.Evil-James Bond types...lol...yeah, sure.

You live in your fantasy world I'll stay in the real one.

JB's picture

'19 guys with boxcutters' is conspiracy.

 

just so you know. ;)

Clashfan's picture

Nmewn unfortunately spouts, "How do you reconcile amatuer pilots, flying jumbo jets, hitting precisely where demolition charges were pre-planted, survived impact, then detonated?" Hello? Remote control? The ultimate in "pre-planning?" And straw man? Demolition charges were planted all over the buildings, not just where the planes hit.

This is why I use this as a litmus test. I notice the ad hominems flying with wonton abrasion in his post, too. Disappointing.

Bringin It's picture

Disappointing, but typical nememwn. 

A true multiple personality in that he is rational ... but he is not

kill switch's picture

 who believe the truther shit of Tarpley (Geopol), GW's yellow jounalism and the rest of the unproven, speculatory bilge spewed about.

You live in your fantasy world I'll stay in the real one.

HAHAHAHAHAHA  naive!!!! Your world of reality, Obama, Federal Reserve, Goldman, JPM.... Please re-disappear yourself!!

A 40 story building collapses in NY NY and The Kean / Hamilton commission never mentioned it,,,ha That's your reality.... Go with it as you are steeped in the quagmire of delusional and potent for you, government propaganda...

Two years eleven weeks and you still don't get it....Now your tiring me out !!!

 

At a deeper level, closer to the heart of the matter, the Kean-Hamilton has failed to indict the real September criminals. It leaves untouched the network of moles in the US government without whose efforts, both in preparation and in coverup, the events of 9/11 could never have happened. It has not identified the clandestine command center which directed the operation. It has taken not one step towards locating the technocrats of death who actually had the physical and technical capability to make these events happen, in contrast to the supermarket-caliber terrorists who are supposed to have caused them. All of these networks remain in place, and remain anxious to avoid detection.

 

The September criminals and their project, the clash of civilizations in the form of a new Thirty Years War, remain at large, their desperation magnified, but their power undiminished.

 

Think of this when you hear the strident clatter of the any regime as it warns the public that a new wave of terror attacks, quite possibly using weapons of mass destruction of the atomic, bacteriological and chemical varieties, is inevitable.. The government has failed us, and the Kean-Hamilton Commission has failed us, before, during and after 9/11. The September criminals remain in place, with every intention of striking again, then to take cover behind the shield of martial law.

 

We are opposed to terrorism. We seek to prevent a new wave of terrorism. We want to identify the September criminals and bring them to justice, because no one has laid a glove on them so far. We have no illusions about the psychotic Arab patsies whose antics are being used to cover up what was in reality a coup d’etat made in the USA, a coup d’etat not against the Presidency but in favor of a specific policy, that of the clash of civilizations.

 

We condemn terrorism because terrorism is the means used by oligarchs to wage secret war against the people. But the terrorism we fight is the real terrorism of the real world, not the idiotic distortions dished up by the regime and the media.

 

The official 9/11 account has by now taken on all the characteristics of a myth. In the minds of many, credulousness in regard to the myth has taken on the overtones of religious sanctity. It has taken root deeply in the dark places of the American mind. The myth is a sensitive subject, hedged round with powerful reaction formations and fearful taboos. Challenge these and the subject will often respond with irrational anger and indignation. Nevertheless, the fact remains: the official version has never been proved. It is an unproven assertion, and in the end a myth. Attempts to base an entire world order on unproven assertions and lies did not fare well in the twentieth century: the war guilt clause of the Versailles Treaty of 1919, which assigned exclusive responsibility for the war to Germany and her allies, while completely exonerating the Allies, was intended as a means to extort some 55 billion gold dollars in reparations. But it turned out to be the key to Hitler’s successful demagogy, and generally one of the main causes for fascism, Nazism, and World War II. Let us not build our political house on unproven assertions.

 

Indeed, we should recall that it was the Nazis themselves who avidly embraced myth as the basis for politics: the official chief ideologist of the Nazi movement was Alfred Rosenberg, and his famous work was The Myth of the Twentieth Century. The story of Osama in the distant cave is already the myth of the twenty-first century.

 

 

psychobilly's picture

the nmewn troll is of the hasbarat variety, so what did you expect?  if you want to know what nmewn "thinks" about 9/11, just turn on the boob tube.

unsurprisingly, he also has a huge military fetish which factors in, as if the military isn't a socialist/statist institution.  he's quite confused.

he was probably busy playing with his GI Joe action figures when you first posted that.

Clashfan's picture

Ty, Psychobilly. I think it's a good test for highlighting the suspiciousness of others on the net. If someone is defending large chunks of the official, farcical version of events, that someone is suspicious to me. There's either some cognitive dissonance going on or something more nefarious.

Ookspay's picture

It would have been done in half the time at half the cost if the Fedgov was not involved.

There is a highway bi-pass under construction in my county. It has been three years and is waaaay over budget and has completely missed the completion date. The union extortionists work around 7 hours per day, no weekends nights or holidays. They have signal sign holders making $60 an hour. All workers must be Union! My neighbor, who is a foreman, just hired his kid for the summer as a laborer, $34 bucks an hour to start! A non-union company would have worked 24/7 and it would have been completed years ago, far cheaper. There is a lovely sign thanking Obama by name for his "stimulus".

LetThemEatRand's picture

'It would have been done in half the time at half the cost if the Fedgov was not involved."

Except it wasn't.  


prole's picture

Yeah and we have you and your ilk to thank for that.

Thank you Socialists for ruining my once-fair country

Harlequin001's picture

You mean the 'once fair country' that you stole from the native Indians yes?

So where does the 'my ' come into this?

Surely it should read 'Thank you Socialists for ruining this once-fair country that we stole from someone else" should it not?

so who've you got to thank for what then squatter?

Er hang on, shouldn't you be dead by now?

prole's picture

I'll go back to my country if you'll go back to your country Bibi.

Funny how you get standing ovations in my Senate though. Almost as if they work for you not for me?

Talk about squatters and conquest, look in the mirror you fvcking hypocrite

Harlequin001's picture

You can't even fucking spell it. A little too keen to criticise me thinks, it was after all, a serious question.

On that subject of hypocrisy you keep raising, which seems to be defined as 'something that applies to everyone else but me', what happened to the 'Give me Liberty, or give me death' bullshit you keep banging on about?

or let me guess, was it ''Give me Liberty, or give everyone else death'. Or were you perhaps just trying to incite others to go and die for something you're only prepared to gob off about, a lot eh?

Perhaps you'd be good enough to let us know some of the really good things you've been doing to obtain this 'Liberty' and avoid this 'death' bit or will you now just admit it was all, as I suspected at the time, nothing but pure what's the descriptive words for this, ah yes, 'lame arsed spew', something we've come to expect from you now that it's becoming evident that death is a little too inconvenient and costly for you, but clearly not for others, and maybe 'Liberty' ain't quite worth it after all?

But then what I have gathered from your rantings so far is that you probably couldn't even define it...

so, best to call everyone a hypocrite again and hope nobody notices your little failings eh...

But that doesn't work because the instant you start typing we can tell that you're still here unfortunately, and that death will just have to wait for another day... I take it the double edged axe trick I suggested yesterday didn't work then, or did you run at it so fast you missed?

prole's picture

Yeah I missed. But I applaud you for consistency in continuing to mock the words of Patrick Henry. Why not carry it through and mock all the Founding Fathers of my country? What do you think of my personal heroes George Washington and Thomas Jefferson? "Banging on About?" Are you British? What is Banging on about? (not that I care what you say) gob off? where do they talk like that?

"Let us know?" Who is "us" you troll? Who is "us" you and the knesset?

"Something we've come to expect" who is "we" troll? You are some Commie outsider who is "us" you have no support or interest in your posts

Harlequin001's picture

George Washington was a slaver. Jefferson was a slaver. Hancock was a celebrated smuggler. Hamilton wasn't even fucking born there and Madison too, was a slaver.

You don't need to go too far to read up on the bullshit if you must. By all accounts, the MSM was just as active back then as it is now, if in a different form. Oh the hand wringing about freedom, and for the black man too, oh the calls for freedom for all enshrined in law and a Bill of Rights for everyone except those they could get away with excluding, which fortunately, just like everything else resulted in just enough freedom for all colonials to not interfere with their way of life and let's not forget their profits either eh. Charles Lynch actually had the gall to ask the new post Revolutionary govt to specifically exonerate him from any liability for illegally incarcerating British supporters during the war. Apparently he didn't want to be sued for inflicting all this fairness and freedom on his fellow colonials. If the Revolution left us with nothing else it left us with the Lynch mob. How do you possibly expect any good to come from people like this? Some founding fathers eh. What fucking chance do you think these types of people have of ever producing any legal framework that actually works? None. zero. nada. How about 'fuck all squared'.

Nothing has changed in the colonies it seems, apart from the idiots and loons who think they're onto something with this 'Republic". You'd think they'd learn wouldn't you?

The words 'Give me Liberty or give me death' actually had some meaning for these people because had they failed, death is what they would have had at the hands of a British noose, and had they not succeeded, bankruptcy with the end of the slave trade would most certainly have followed. It appears these particular individuals had no choice to revolt, just needed to con all the other deluded rubes into thinking they all had some skin in the game as well eh? A bit like yourself it seems...

But therein lies another conundrum. On the one hand you argue for anarchy yet you seem to defend the Founding Fathers. Hypocrisy it seems. 'Give me Liberty or give me death' - these were your words written without any reference to anyone else and uttered in a debate about anarchy, an idea of which you were somewhat in support.

Now then, just to clear up, 'banging on about' refers to constantly banging your gums together and making no coherent sense, and 'gob off' means precisely that, running off at the gob, or mouth, like you do...

There, have we cleared that up now?

Clashfan's picture

TY, Ookspay. Third comment tonight that almost made me spit beer on myself. I'm managing, though.

Cool SN, too. This site is a blast. Thanks again.

Ookspay's picture

YW,

The Clash was such a big part of my college years; Iggy Pop, Sex pistols, Elvis C.. My Favorite Clash Tune...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Be2pMMYNzQ8

Cheers -Ookspay

moroots's picture

The highways were originally (and legitimately) built to help the military move around, which is absolutely within the confines of the constitution and in the spirit of liberty.  But that doesn't matter because nowadays user fees - excises on gasoline and tolls - should be more than sufficient to maintain the roads and build new highways.  Anyone who does not want to pay user fees has the option of not using the roads.

No matter I hate this argument because there is so much extraneous BS that the government does that would be far easier to get rid of before we have to talk about roads.  "But who will build the roads" they say.  So that justifies the layers upon layers of beauracracy, the war mongering, the corporate & international welfare, and the transfer payments that are the real cause of U.S. bankruptcy?

You're also not correct in labelling Ron Paul a corporatist.  He has said that GM, the banks, etc. should have been allowed to fail in 2008.  He advocates abolishing the Fed which is the ultimate instrument of corporatism.  Obviously he has voted against (if there were even votes) corporate welfare programs that gave us Solyndra, Ener1, etc.  Respecting the private property rights of a corporation does not a corporatist make.  Advocating special priviliges and the alliance of government and corporations does.  Ron Paul has never been that guy.

delacroix's picture

we have not paid back any debt since 1955. it's all been done with credit expansion.

mathdock's picture

The Interstate Highway System was originally an applied Defense program, actually, to connect all the bases in the country with REAL roads during a time when invasion was seriously considered and backup bombers' landing strips were needed in case the Soviets thought it a good idea to nuke our AF bases.  The requirement for straightways of a certain length every x number of miles was built into the legislation.  The congress converted it in short order to be a trucking support system,  which indeed provides a lot of bang for the bucks.  And then the dummies put the interstates smack into the middle of major cities instead of skirting them as was originally envisioned.

I think in time of war they still can be commandeered for military necessity.   Personally, I think they should all be toll roads--user pays, no subsidy.  With the new generation of transponders/bar code readers, I'd expect a resurgence of tolling to pay for upkeep and re-construction, since revenue-eating toll collectors would not be needed.  Of course, that would push the big rigs onto the old, skinny roads through similarly small towns where the local constabulkary can ticket them for various offenses.

Let's hear it for digital dollars!

 

LetThemEatRand's picture

Funding of NASA which has created more jobs than you can count and entire technologies such as GPS that otherwise would not exist?

Redistribution.

CaptainObvious's picture

Yeah, where WOULD we be without all those six figure paycheck scientists listening to radio static in the SETI program? ;)

I'm not against all taxes.  I went to public school, which was paid for by taxes.  I drive on roads, which were paid for by taxes.  What I'm against is the gratuitous waste of the money that I pay in taxes.  I'm against gold plated pensions for public servants who earn more in their 40 year retirement than I earn in my entire career.  I'm against SSI disability for those who successfully game the system and could damn well work if they had to.  I'm against my tax dollars being used to subsidize industries and businesses, which artificially raises prices and takes yet more of the dollars I bust my ass to earn.  I don't advocate for NO tax...I advocate for LESS tax spent MORE wisely.  So yeah, redistribute a little, but there have to be limits, and we, the taxpayers (the employers, in a sense) should damn well be allowed to say what those limits are.

LetThemEatRand's picture

We can agree on much of this.

At least half of your money goes to fund the MIC.

Ron Paul (though Not Rand apparently) opposed this.

I voted for Ron.

I will not vote for Rand.

delacroix's picture

all of our taxes, don't even pay for half of what the gov. spends

CaptainObvious's picture

Sorry, the double posting gremlin paid me a visit.

A Nanny Moose's picture

"....such as GPS that otherwise would not exist?"

The better to track you with Little Red Riding Hood. You have no proof that the GPS system, or something even better would not have come along, had Gummint not provided funding. Not for gubmint, we would have discovered tele-fucking-port-goddam-tation buy now you Statist asshat.

Don't come crying to me when your masters Lo-Jack your fucking sorry Statist ass.

/rant off.

Yes_Questions's picture

 

 

You have a point here such that the proof is anecdotal wherein the Federal Government alone is willing and able to commit the HUGE sums to something like the Space Program.

So, who/what would have funded a Space Program if not the Federal Government?

+Tang, microwave ovens, GPS, Velcro, weather satellites, and ZGF!

 

LetThemEatRand's picture

Airports?

Redistribution.

Motley Fool's picture

Nope. Hookers and blow. Screw flying when I can get high at home.

LetThemEatRand's picture

So if trickle down works, why have we reached the cliff of economic obliteration just 40 years after Reagan and everyone thereafter (including Obama) embraced the idea?  

Corporate tax rates are at multi-generational lows.

Same with individual tax rates.

It's a lie.  It's pure ideology.

Acorn10012's picture

Obama doesn't embrace trickle-down economics.

LetThemEatRand's picture

Really?

Have you looked at the tax rate under this Presidency?

Stop watching Fox and learn something.