“I’ll put them in camps”: Rand Paul mocks GOP field for hardline rhetoric towards illegals

[helmuth_hubener]

Do Kentuckians have to invite people from Ohio to come to their state? No. People are free to move there if they want and Kentucky can't put up a police state and keep them out.

Not one of you immigration statists here have made a case for a qualitative difference between a border in Kentucky and a border in Canada. People are not less free if they reside outside of a line drawn on a map.

I welcome you to come to my thread about immigration and make your case.

 

[devil21]

Yeah, no chit. Dumb as hell, or looking for a fast exit; which is stupid as hell. Rand needs to find a nice way to bow out... Flat out losing, will destroy any future presidential chances. I don't know what the hell he is doing, but he is not very smart doing whatever it is.

Whoa, what are you smoking Dianne? I can't imagine you really think there's any seriousness behind rhetoric of rounding up illegals and putting them in camps. Rand's comments were clearly poking fun at Trump's blustery but (as usual) empty red-meat rhetoric to the low info types about building great walls and camps. Ron said the immigration issue is a WELFARE STATE problem that won't be fixed by walls or camps. Ron didn't support walls or camps nor does Rand, so I don't understand where your problem with Rand's comments come from. If you recall, Ron warned that walls keep people in. Rounding up illegals is rooted in REX 84. Be careful what you wish for.

 

[RonPaulMall]

Yeah, no chit. Dumb as hell, or looking for a fast exit; which is stupid as hell. Rand needs to find a nice way to bow out... Flat out losing, will destroy any future presidential chances. I don't know what the hell he is doing, but he is not very smart doing whatever it is.

Rand won't drop out till after New Hampshire at the earliest. I don't think he cares about "future Presidential races" because if this election has taught us anything, it is that Rand is woefully lacking in the political instincts necessary to run a Presidential campaign. So he might as well stay in it and hope for a miracle in either Iowa or New Hampshire. 2020 will be Amash, or Brat, or maybe even Sanford's turn.

 

[acptulsa]

If Kentucky made an agreement to allow people from Ohio, they should honor it. Otherwise, they should be free to do whatever they want.

And the Constitution be damned? Because there's no other way, in this case.

Is there something in the Constitution that says that some men are not endowed with unalienable rights? The Bill of Rights says ALL men.

The quote you're alluding to is from the Declaration. And the answer to your question is there was, back before it was amended.

 

[Dianne]

Dianne, I understand your sentiment, but if Rand wouldn't have gotten on those highly-visible committees, no one would have heard of him. And McConnell did that for him. Think about it. McConnell was going to win anyway. So, nothing was lost, but a lot was gained. That's how I view it anyway. It's hard at times, but I try to take the long picture.

I guess you're right.... but I would rather have fifteen root canals in one day, rather than endorse Mitch McConnell for anything other than an assistant, to assistant, of assistant to a school teacher.

 

[Krugminator2]

At this point it is clear that Rand wants to lose. Maybe he's been threatened, or bought off. This is not the rhetoric of a man who wants to win the GOP nomination.

If he keeps heading down this road he will be known as the Great Betrayer of the liberty movement. My disappointment could hardly be more complete.

So by saying something that indisputably consistent with libertarianism, he is the Great Betrayer of the liberty movement?

 

[Krugminator2]

I guess you're right.... but I would rather have fifteen root canals in one day, rather than endorse Mitch McConnell for anything other than an assistant, to assistant, of assistant to a school teacher.

Why do you think Thomas Massie endorsed Mitch McConnell over Bevin?

Your hero, Ron Paul, the guy you would go to the depths for, endorsed this guy in a tight race. http://reason.com/blog/2008/08/27/don-young-inches-ahead-with-a

Ron Paul literally swung a race to the worst person in Congress. Ron Paul was THE deciding factor. Mitch McConnell may as well be the leader of Liberty Movement compared to Don Young. McConnell is liberty's best friend compared to Don Young. Nobody is perfect. The standard that Rand gets held to is something the real Ron Paul could not even live up to.

 

[jj-]

Ron Paul literally swung a race to the worst person in Congress. Ron Paul was THE deciding factor. Mitch McConnell may as well be the leader of Liberty Movement compared to Don Young. McConnell is liberty's best friend compared to Don Young. Nobody is perfect. The standard that Rand gets held to is something the real Ron Paul could not even live up to.

I've never even heard of Don Young, he has no influence.

 

[Krugminator2]

I've never even heard of Don Young, he has no influence.

He has some influence. He was the guy responsible for the Bridge to Nowhere.

The point is how is endorsing McConnell worse than endorsing Don Young? McConnell has 75% score from Freedomworks. He is bad but not the worst. Don Young is at 55%. And McConnell was winning no matter what. There was no reason for Ron Paul to step into a race and bailout a sleezeball.

 

[CPUd]

Ron typically did not endorse primary challengers over an incumbent. I'm not sure if he ever did after rejoining the GOP.

 

[ChristianAnarchist]

Sorry baby, I was a libertarian before you were born. I won't leave this RonPaulForum. I still have the dream, that Ron's principals will win. And I will be there to support him 24/7 as I have, since 2007.

You are terribly rude to ask me to leave this forum because I don't bow down to Rand Paul. What's your agenda? You think that is nice or classy to ask people to leave the forum because they don't agree with you? . What do you want? Three people here?

I question your motives, more than I do anyone with a legitimate argument. You tell me now in five sentences, why I should spend my money and campaign for Rand Paul:

YOUR TURN: Here and Now:

ONE, is all you should need. The man you claim is your inspiration puts his full support and endorsement to Rand Paul...

 

[puppetmaster]

Do Kentuckians have to invite people from Ohio to come to their state? No. People are free to move there if they want and Kentucky can't put up a police state and keep them out.

Not one of you immigration statists here have made a case for a qualitative difference between a border in Kentucky and a border in Canada. People are not less free if they reside outside of a line drawn on a map.

You one world people live in a dream state and yes Kentucky can stop immigration to Kentucky by succession from the US.

 

[Sola_Fide]

You one world people live in a dream state and yes Kentucky can stop immigration to Kentucky by succession from the US.

One world? No, I'm not a one world person. I'm a one man type of person. All people who value liberty must regiment their political and social priorities to make the individual primary, not the state.

Secondly, whether or not Kentucky secedes is not relevant. Lines on a map, no matter where they are, do not affect the freedom of man.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

Rand is an idiot.. I think I'll visit this forum to check on issues of liberty. But Trump, a Mafia, casino owning, mafia owned, married to a tramp, Pelosi supporting low life catapult to #1 in the GOP primaries because he is talking about deporting criminal illegals and building a fence to keep them out. And Rand is so damn, f'king dumb, arrogant, he is going to make fun of Trump's stand.

I'm done with Rand ... Loved his father, but Rand is out of my life. He's an idiot. I almost donated to him, but thank God; I waited to see what he is made of ..... which is nothing.

I'll sit this next primary and election cycle out !!!! Not a one in this crowd worthy of my gas to get to the polls.

good riddance

 

[r3volution 3.0]

We need to secure the borders, deport the illegals who have a criminal record, cut off all welfare benefits to illegals, etc. That's a realistic policy proposal. It's not realistic whatsoever to say that all illegal immigrants are going to be deported, and Rand is right to speak out against the absurdity of such an idea.

Indeed

Rand won't and mustn't get behind mass deportation; aside from being extraordinarily evil, it's a guaranteed loser in the general election.

There's absolutely no point in winning the nomination on that platform.

Uber-hawks on immigration are going to hate on Rand for mocking their insane fantasies, but that's just the way it's got to be.