Rand Paul may be Ron Paul’s son, but he is definitely no Ron Paul. A recent press release reveals the truth about this neocon:
Leading United States Senate candidate Rand Paul today criticized the Obama administration’s decision to close the Guantanamo Bay detention center and try terrorism suspects in United States Civil Courts.
[...]
Dr. Paul believes in strong national defense and thinks military spending should be our country’s top budget priority. He has also called for a Constitutional declaration of war with Afghanistan.
I met Rand at a Ron Paul campaign event in Dallas a while back. Something about him raised red flags but I wasn’t sure what it was. It appears my instincts were correct.
The instinct you got was that he was cagey about responding to foreign policy questions. Thats was what I picked up. I must say Peter Schiff is like this as well. He talked about bombing nuclear facilities as well.
Rand Paul is attempting to bring the right to declare war back to Congress where it belongs – and thus give the public more say on the matter. Since the Korean War in 1950 the USG has conducted “back-door” wars without Congressional (and thus public) approval. As result we now have trillions of war debt to repay.
Also, he’s not neo-con. Its simply conservative. Most conservatives believe in the same thing he does. Neo-con aka New Conservative believes in big government, which he clearly does not
I understand how you feel. I disagree with Rand Paul on this particular issue too. But 4rc is right. He’s definitely NOT a Neo-Con. Rand Paul, even though I might disagree with him on this issue, is definitely more Libertarian and non-interventionist then any other Senator currently in Congress. Not just marginally better. He’s superior by a galaxy! Please, read some of my commentary here before you through him under a bus.
Divide and conquer: It's What The Establishment Wants
If you still don’t want to support him after you’ve read this and paused for a couple moments, I’ll understand.
Thank you for your consideration,
Tracy
If you are for the military state, you are for big government.
What will people do when millions of dollars and thousands of man hours are spent on guys who will not be elected? Or worse yet, they are elected, and then go to Washington and start trading votes to advance their agenda, becoming less principled Ron Paul look-alikes?
People forget, Ron Paul didn’t run in 08 to be elected. He ran to spread ideas. These guys actually want to win. They will have to destroy any principles or ideas they started out with, or their opponents will demolish them in the court of public opinion.
The sad fact is, many Americans believe that government is good, the wars are just, Americans are exceptional, it is the sovereign right of Americans to get cheap labour from Asia, and the President is divine.
The leadership, ideas and actions of a government are merely a reflection of the moral and intellectual quality of its citizens.
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard.
- H. L. Mencken
“but he is definitely no Ron Paul.”
Whew, that is a relief. Maybe he can actually win in Kentucky, Lord knows Ron Paul didn’t in 2008.
You can hardly claim that Rand Paul is for the military state.
Rand wants to dismantle much of the military state, and bring the troops home from Iraq. He’d be the most pro-peace member of the US Senate by a long shot — in spite of disagreeing with us over this one issue.
Check this out. In addition to my piece that I wrote linked above (Please, you need to read it.)
Carol Paul, Ron Paul’s Wife Weighs in.
Tracy
“Dr. Paul believes in strong national defense and thinks military spending should be our country’s top budget priority.”
Understand what he is saying here. He is stating that the federal government should not be allowed to re-distribute wealth as it has been doing for the past 100 years. The focus of the federal government is to defend our rights and liberties. If all the welfare spending was cut back/eliminated, then defense spending would be the largest piece of the pie in other words.
Rand Paul deserves a bit more breathing room than we have showed him in the past few days.
Personally I’m 100% behind Rand Paul, but I am disappointed in how quickly some supporters have fell for this “divide and conquer” tactic thrown our way by his opponent.
Don’t look now, but Rand Paul just said that troop levels in Afghanistan is the domain of the President-
http://www.tookookyforkentucky.com/?p=398
[...] deal of Rand Paul’s victory over his ideologically identical opponent Trey Grayson. They are both neocons. Either way we [...]
[...] big deal of Rand Paul’s victory over his ideologically identical opponent Trey Grayson. They are both neocons. Either way we [...]
I’m for him because he feels a declaration of war should be necessary for us to be in Iraq or Afghanistan.
While I would vote against him on that declaration… WE BOTH ARE CONSTITUTIONALISTS because the vote took place!!!
This is not the system we live under today!
Rand Paul a Neo-Con. You sir, are an idiot.
You find one thing he has said about having a strong defense and stretch that into NeoCon. Give me a break.
You remind me of all these chicken littles out there every-time someone farts they start running in circles yelling false flag! false flag!
Rand paul is had to figure but i think both he and the old man are insiders high level elites masking as anti-elite. opression will come rapped in an american flag. if he is not neocon why is he supported by palin? maybe he will supprise me, if he is the real deal we need 10 more like him. i always wondered who ron paul got so much face time on msnbc and was treated like a masonic brother..
I agree with jayho. It seems like a case of co-opting. The emergence of Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck as the “heads” of the teaparty is another example. In a similar way, Kucinich seems like the controlled opposition on the left in the way he always referenced the UN having decision making on our foriegn policy. Also relevent to co-opting dissent is the new Maine Republican Platform.
[...] 20, 2010 by disinter Rachel Maddow attacked neocon-Rand on her propaganda show tonight over his correct position that the government has no authority to [...]
[...] big deal of Rand Paul’s victory over his ideologically identical opponent Trey Grayson. They are both neocons. Either way we [...]
[...] do not support Rand Paul because he is a neocon. However, he is correct on this issue and his response to Maddow didn’t help him [...]