Glenn Beck discusses Rand Paul endorsement

Many of the "Ron Paulians" he is talking about are just about done with Ron too, not just Rand. What does that make of his argument?

On the bright side, look how your team is growing. Rand, Romney, Cruz, Beck, etc. Great for liberty. Well, except for the people that don't want to pay for a war with Iran. Or people who don't want to die in a war with Iran. Or the people whose dollars will be worthless after war with Iran. Or the people who don't want to be indefinitely detained or assassinated for opposing war with Iran.

Wow, I guess there isn't room for "compromise" when true liberty is connected to every issue. Even Iran warmongering. It isn't a step in the right direction. It isn't a step in any direction. It is standing still.
 
was it Glenn Beck that was peddling/advertising some gold company that was selling gold at a 110% mark up? pretty sure it was him... Anthony Weiner called him out on him...it was either beck or another one, but pretty sure it was back...
 
cajuncocoa said:
^^This.

And the man who single-handedly destroyed Debra Medina's chance to be Gov. of Texas.

I don't give a $hit what Glenn Beck thinks of us.
Click to expand...

Let's not forget that, right after Beck trashed her for being a 9/11 truther, good old Alex Jones also ripped Debra Medina for not defending 9/11 truthers. F both of them.
Funny how the media works together to keep our people down and keep us fighting amongst each other.
 
I think it's an embarrassment when bots just go along with whatever their heroes do, no matter how sophistic they have to be to make excuses for it. Like Obama-bots, and Romney-bots, and all those Bush-bots, and now...

...well, you know.

We're the only movement who question our leaders when they cross lines we don't like. We're the only ones willing to say "we had hoped you'd be our candidate in 2016, but now that's not going to happen". Well, I should say "it isn't going to happen AND simultaneously keep this movement intact". You can replace us with the Glenn Becks of the world...they'll join if we have to leave when you guys still run Rand in 2016.

Everyone is acting like this is all over the endorsement when it isn't. He has done several problematic things in the Senate. And don't give the "he's the best Senator" relative BS. Yes he's the best sEnator, but that isn't to say he didn't go against us, libertarian philosophy, and the Constitution several times. I need but one example as to why I'm through with him:

He voted for sanction against Iran, an act of war without a Declaration of War, hence unConstitutional. He sophistically added an Amendment to the Bill that basically said 'this act of war is no way to be construed as an act of war'. That cured NOTHING.

I was done with him right then. This endorsement thing was expected (he had been saying he would endorse the Party's nominee for some time now), so it's not why many of us have turned on him (more like he turned on us). If it is why you woke up to this guy's crap, then fine...bet I suggest not having emotional reasons in the future, and having more principled reasons. Principles last, and emotions fade. I don't want anyone forgiving this guy come 2016. We have to nominate someone else or this movement just sank like the Titanic.

Principles over Party...and over family names too.
 
Last edited:
John F Kennedy III said:
Pulled straight out of RPF threads. Gives yourselves a pat on the back guys.
Click to expand...

So now everyone who opposes Rand is one thing. Collectivism?

He deserves to be disliked. No one should be nasty about it, but he deserves the heat. I don't hate him personally, I hate some of his votes. This endorsement stuff is just a the cherry on top.

I'll pat myself on the back for not supporting someone who votes for unconstitutional acts of war like sanctions when no declaration of war has occured to make it a constitutional act.
 
bxm042 said:
I stopped listening at "earmarks"
Click to expand...

I lied. I actually finished watching.

Glenn Beck was right on point with many of the things he said, and I honestly couldn't be more proud of the movement right now. This could be somewhat of a turning point. When Glenn Beck starts to understand that we won't take no for an answer, we're doing something right.
 
ScotTX said:
Let's not forget that, right after Beck trashed her for being a 9/11 truther, good old Alex Jones also ripped Debra Medina for not defending 9/11 truthers. F both of them.
Funny how the media works together to keep our people down and keep us fighting amongst each other.
Click to expand...

this.
 
ScotTX said:
Let's not forget that, right after Beck trashed her for being a 9/11 truther, good old Alex Jones also ripped Debra Medina for not defending 9/11 truthers. F both of them.
Funny how the media works together to keep our people down and keep us fighting amongst each other.
Click to expand...
i would give you every single +rep i have (even the fake ones) if i could .
 
cajuncocoa said:
^^This.

And the man who single-handedly destroyed Debra Medina's chance to be Gov. of Texas.

I don't give a $hit what Glenn Beck thinks of us.
Click to expand...

Very true ... being from Texas and voting for Medina, who had a great shot until that interview, I'll never forgive that!
Freaking Perry ... ugh.
 
The Gold Standard said:
Many of the "Ron Paulians" he is talking about are just about done with Ron too, not just Rand. What does that make of his argument?

On the bright side, look how your team is growing. Rand, Romney, Cruz, Beck, etc. Great for liberty. Well, except for the people that don't want to pay for a war with Iran. Or people who don't want to die in a war with Iran. Or the people whose dollars will be worthless after war with Iran. Or the people who don't want to be indefinitely detained or assassinated for opposing war with Iran.

Wow, I guess there isn't room for "compromise" when true liberty is connected to every issue. Even Iran warmongering. It isn't a step in the right direction. It isn't a step in any direction. It is standing still.
Click to expand...

Rand will never support war with Iran. I don't know where Cruz stands on that issue.
 
ProIndividual said:
I think it's an embarrassment when bots just go along with whatever their heroes do, no matter how sophistic they have to be to make excuses for it. Like Obama-bots, and Romney-bots, and all those Bush-bots, and now...

...well, you know.

We're the only movement who question our leaders when they cross lines we don't like. We're the only ones willing to say "we had hoped you'd be our candidate in 2016, but now that's not going to happen". Well, I should say "it isn't going to happen AND simultaneously keep this movement intact". You can replace us with the Glenn Becks of the world...they'll join if we have to leave when you guys still run Rand in 2016.

Everyone is acting like this is all over the endorsement when it isn't. He has done several problematic things in the Senate. And don't give the "he's the best Senator" relative BS. Yes he's the best sEnator, but that isn't to say he didn't go against us, libertarian philosophy, and the Constitution several times. I need but one example as to why I'm through with him:

He voted for sanction against Iran, an act of war without a Declaration of War, hence unConstitutional. He sophistically added an Amendment to the Bill that basically said 'this act of war is no way to be construed as an act of war'. That cured NOTHING.

I was done with him right then. This endorsement thing was expected (he had been saying he would endorse the Party's nominee for some time now), so it's not why many of us have turned on him (more like he turned on us). If it is why you woke up to this guy's crap, then fine...bet I suggest not having emotional reasons in the future, and having more principled reasons. Principles last, and emotions fade. I don't want anyone forgiving this guy come 2016. We have to nominate someone else or this movement just sank like the Titanic.

Principles over Party...and over family names too.
Click to expand...

I disagree with Rand's vote in favor of sanctions on Iran, but if you have to agree with a politician on every single issue in order to support him or her, you'll never be able to vote for anyone. There isn't anyone who's a perfect candidate, including Ron.
 
Traditional Conservative said:
I disagree with Rand's vote in favor of sanctions on Iran, but if you have to agree with a politician on every single issue in order to support him or her, you'll never be able to vote for anyone. There isn't anyone who's a perfect candidate, including Ron.
Click to expand...

For me it's not about being in 100% agreement "on the issues." There are a number of issues that have more than one right answer, and on some of these I disagree with Dr. Paul, but I still respect him because of his principles & integrity. When it comes to principles & integrity, he has a pretty goddamn good track record, if not perfect.

There are other candidates that I view in similar esteem ( they are perfect so far, just not as proven of a track record ). So your argument that "noone is perfect, not even Ron" doesn't really hold water IMO
 
July said:
It's a rational argument, but unfortunately not a very sincere one on his part, I'm afraid. Wasn't he calling RP supporters 'terrorists' on air just a couple months ago? Or was that Rush? I think they both did.
Click to expand...

Will you hold the Ron Paul supporters, who called Rand a traitor and worse, to the same measuring stick when they realize that he is not?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Brian4Liberty
Dr. Rand Paul Joins Kudlow to Discuss the Border
Replies
0
Views
1K
Brian4Liberty
Brian4Liberty
Occam's Banana
Rand Paul interview w/Glenn Greenwald @ SYSTEM UPDATE
Replies
2
Views
2K
Occam's Banana
Occam's Banana
Brian4Liberty
Rand Paul on Russell Brand Podcast
Replies
1
Views
924
jmdrake
jmdrake
jct74
Inside RFK Jr.'s Political Bromance With Rand Paul
Replies
0
Views
982
jct74
jct74
Brian4Liberty
America is making a HUGE mistake! (ft. Senator Rand Paul)
Replies
3
Views
2K
oyarde
O
Back
Top