Are Ron Paul’s hard-core stands a problem for son’s presidential bid?

green73

green73

Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2007
Messages
13,670
Are Ron Paul’s hard-core stands a problem for son’s presidential bid?

Rand Paul wants to lead the United States. On Saturday in Texas, his father was speaking at a conference about how to leave it.

“A lot of times people think secession, they paint it as an absolute negative,” said former representative Ron Paul (R-Tex.). After all, Paul said, the American Revolution was a kind of secession. “You mean we should have been obedient to the king forever? So it’s all in the way you look at it.”

This weekend was a crucial one for Rand Paul, the Republican senator from Kentucky and un*declared candidate for the presidency. He was in California, trying to line up donors at an opulent retreat organized by the billionaire Koch brothers.

At the same time, his father — retired after 12 terms in Congress and three presidential runs — was in the ballroom of an airport hotel here, the final speaker at “a one-day seminar in breaking away from the central state.” He followed a series of speakers who said that the U.S. economy and political establishment were tottering and that the best response might be for states, counties or even individuals to break away.

“The America we thought we knew, ladies and gentlemen, is a mirage. It’s a memory. It’s a foreign country,” Jeff Deist, Ron Paul’s former press secretary and chief of staff, told the group. “And that’s precisely why we should take secession seriously.”

The contrasting scenes this weekend illuminate the odd situation of the Pauls as the 2016 campaign season begins. They are a father and son tied together — but running in opposite directions.
Click to expand...

cont.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...3b1cdc-a4a9-11e4-a7c2-03d37af98440_story.html
 
A spokesman for Rand Paul said he was not available to comment for this story. Both Pauls have said that if Rand Paul runs for president, his father will not campaign with him.
Click to expand...

I guess there's that, then.
 
At this point I've pretty much accepted that Rand Paul is his own person and that he's going to play the game to win it. If that's the case, I think its better for Ron Paul, Rand Paul, AND the liberty movement if Ron doesn't campaign with Rand.

Personally, I'd rather stick to principles than play to win, but everyone has their own strategy and path.
 
They are really trying to create a rift between potential Rand supporters, Ron Paul and his most strident fans. The funny part is the MSM isn't picking up that it is BETTER that Ron is not campaigning with Rand, and no Rand will not ask his own father to "shut up".
 
Are Ron Paul’s hard-core stands a problem for son’s presidential bid?
Click to expand...

Obviously, but there would be no Rand Paul presidential bid at all, nor a Senator Rand Paul, without those hard-core stands of the past.

So...welcome to our struggle. :)
 
Are Ron Paul’s hard-core stands a problem for son’s presidential bid?

And if not, how can we as the Washington Post do what we conceive our job to be and turn it into a problem for him?
 
On Saturday in Texas, his father was speaking at a conference about how to leave it.
Click to expand...

i-tcpzY07ctvyMmSJE7_Hkd9QWM-vHNzRMEjaQK4JOvtTcfo-1m408MukoxEnBO4_FKa3Gxl2ZZSDRJhTRksKOpdzS99Fu3AA7uBNnDWSlTyki-7h0GTyC4PNF19=w470-h313-nc
 
Matt Collins said:
The two are not mutually exclusive.
Click to expand...

To a point. But, this entire immoral society needs to be fixed from the ground up. We need to convert people to libertarian and anti-state ideas one family and one church at a time. The best thing a POTUS can do is stand out of the way when (ideally when, not if) states start trying to secede from the federal power structure. If Rand isn't willing to do that, I doubt he's really that useful anyway. Rand Paul really isn't the point, at all. He's a minor player in all this. Ron Paul was and is far more important because he actually engaged in the goal of waking people up, which is long term far more important than national level politics.

Do I like Rand? Yes. Am I going to vote for him? Yes. Will I encourage others to do so? Yes.

But, I don't support building an entire strategy around him, nor do I support keeping principle "in the closet" in order to help Rand win. In fact, I think if even one libertarian holds back even one controversial position in order to help Rand get elected, we're caring about Ron's son more than we should.
 
FreedomFanatic said:
To a point. But, this entire immoral society needs to be fixed from the ground up. We need to convert people to libertarian and anti-state ideas one family and one church at a time. The best thing a POTUS can do is stand out of the way when (ideally when, not if) states start trying to secede from the federal power structure. If Rand isn't willing to do that, I doubt he's really that useful anyway. Rand Paul really isn't the point, at all. He's a minor player in all this. Ron Paul was and is far more important because he actually engaged in the goal of waking people up, which is long term far more important than national level politics.
Click to expand...

I think Ron pretty much maxed out the educational strategy. The hard fact is that most of the electorate cannot think.

You don't teach them, you lead them by hook or by crook to where you want them to go, for their own good.
 
This was at the January 24th Mises Circle event "On Secession" in Houston TX: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...ssion-quot-(featuring-Ron-Paul-amp-Tom-Woods)

Tom Woods was also a speaker.

Since this was a Mises Institute thing, they'll probably be putting out videos for it sometime soon.

I'll try to keep an eye out for them and update the thread I linked to above (and this one, if someone else doesn't beat me to it).
 
Rand Paul’s 2016 White House aspirations face a real risk: His dad

By David A. Fahrenthold January 25 at 7:59 PM

HOUSTON — Rand Paul wants to lead the United States. On Saturday in Texas, his father was speaking at a conference about how to leave it.

“A lot of times people think secession, they paint it as an absolute negative,” said former representative Ron Paul (R-Tex.). After all, Paul said, the American Revolution was a kind of secession. “You mean we should have been obedient to the king forever? So it’s all in the way you look at it.”

This weekend was a crucial one for Rand Paul, the Republican senator from Kentucky and un*declared candidate for the presidency. He was in California, trying to line up donors at an opulent retreat organized by the billionaire Koch brothers.

At the same time, his father — retired after 12 terms in Congress and three presidential runs — was in the ballroom of an airport hotel here, the final speaker at “a one-day seminar in breaking away from the central state.” He followed a series of speakers who said that the U.S. economy and political establishment were tottering and that the best response might be for states, counties or even individuals to break away.

“The America we thought we knew, ladies and gentlemen, is a mirage. It’s a memory. It’s a foreign country,” Jeff Deist, Ron Paul’s former press secretary and chief of staff, told the group. “And that’s precisely why we should take secession seriously.”
Click to expand...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...4a9-11e4-a7c2-03d37af98440_story.html?hpid=z4
 
So a presidential contender's father puts on a civics class for adults, and we are supposed to think that will be a problem for the son to participate in civics at the highest level?

I am not following the premise here, someone help me out.
 
Walter Block advises Ron Paul to shut up

http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...3b1cdc-a4a9-11e4-a7c2-03d37af98440_story.html

“If I were Ron, and my son were running for president, and we were in the same situation, I would shut up,” said Walter Block, an economics professor at Loyola University in New Orleans. He rated Ron Paul a 98 on his personal scale of libertarianism and Rand Paul a 70, and said he supported them both.

“Ron is a millstone around Rand’s neck, in the sense that he’s not helping him — or, at least, he’s not helping him be Rand,” Block said. “Because Rand is a compromiser, and Ron and ‘compromise’ don’t belong in the same sentence.”
Click to expand...
 
At least the third thread on this, unbroken link to a hit piece, should be in 'spin, chaff and flak', no sane person listens to Ron to see where Rand stands (Rand isn't Dubya--no one has to learn ventriloquism and stick a hand up his ass in order for him to actually be able to express an opinion), and if anyone would do the liberty movement a favor by shutting the hell up it's Walter Block.

Did I miss anything? You ever going to tell us which Taft you named yourself for? Robert A. Taft III, I presume?
 
Last edited:
acptulsa said:
At least the third thread on this, unbroken link to a hit piece, should be in 'spin, chaff and flak
Click to expand...

The medias position is clear; they want to simultaneously insinuate Randal is the same as Ronald and at the same time try to divide his fathers supporters so that they feel like they can't support both. screw em. I stand with both Randal and Ronald.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top