Rand is Getting Skewered Over "Moral Crisis" Comments

[Crashland]

How is telling religious leaders that they are going to have to fight the cultural battle outside of government a change in position?

He didn't say it was.

This wasn't even a statement about Rand's policy position.

Messaging and strategy are important; not just policy. This sort of messaging will turn off a lot of the groups to which Rand appeals right now.

And to pretend like the messaging hasn't changed is disingenuous.

 

[anaconda]

No I think you're in the majority, a growing majority.

It's obvious Rand is going to be just as conservative as everyone else is in the GOP field. Unfortunatley, what he doesn't understand, is he's going to have to spend the bulk of his time explaining his new positions in comparison to his old positions. "Rand later clarified..." is going to be theme of his campaign and nothing else. That's not how you would ideally run for President. This is why he should skip 2016. By being forced to be more conservative than he probably is, he basically being suck into the Right-wing maw rather than staking out a strong position for himself and what he believes in. He could probabaly do this better if the GOP loses in 2016 and turns in resigned defeat to Rand as their only hope. Instead he's going to join 20 other people on one stage all saying how more conservative they are than the other fellow. It's going to be ridiculous and Rand is only going to make himself look ridiculous in the process, not Presidential.

I'm almost beginning to think that Rand actually wants to be asked to clarify previous positions. It just seems to give him more media time. But he most certainly has flip flopped more than once. Aid to Israel and increasing the military budget. Both bad flip flops.

 

[Crashland]

I'm almost beginning to think that Rand actually wants to be asked to clarify previous positions. It just seems to give him more media time. But he most certainly has flip flopped more than once. Aid to Israel and increasing the military budget. Both bad flip flops.

Aid to Israel wasn't really a flip flop. His position is and has always been that we should not cut aid to Israel before/unless cutting aid to all other countries first.

 

[jmdrake]

He didn't say it was.

Okay then. What's the real change in messaging? The last time he spoke on this issue the same folks didn't like the messaging either. In fact this time was milder as he didn't say that gay marriage offended him.

 

[mit26chell]

It's only a 'moral crisis' to Christian religious zealots . . . . which isn't even most Christians.

 

[mit26chell]

Sending foreign aid to Israel is a real moral crisis. Wish someone would call Rand out on that.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

I don't particularly want to paste or link to any of the hit pieces and I'm not sure how to post the video link from my phone, but it's getting quite a bit of media attention and I've seen no mention of it here.

That's funny. I haven't noticed any media attention on this issue. The only mention I've seen is this thread. Obviously there are a couple of obscure blogs from known hater sites, but they do that on a daily basis anyway.

 

[LibertyEagle]

I haven't noticed anything about this in the media, either. But, since you mention it, the country IS in a moral crisis. It is something Ron talked about too. That our government mirrors what is going on in society.

 

[LibertyEagle]

It's only a 'moral crisis' to Christian religious zealots . . . .

.... and people with eyes or ears.

 

[whoisjohngalt]

That's funny. I haven't noticed any media attention on this issue. The only mention I've seen is this thread. Obviously there are a couple of obscure blogs from known hater sites, but they do that on a daily basis anyway.

It was the first hit if you googled Rand's name since Friday. I count 24 articles from MSM that were negative. Bloomberg finally wrote a more balanced piece that came out this morning saying that Rand hasn't flip flopped.

 

[Brett85]

I'm not really the "socially liberal fiscally conservative" libertarian type and don't really have a problem with these types of comments from Rand. That said, I understand that gay marriage is becoming increasingly popular in the United States, and Rand needs to be really careful about what type of rhetoric he uses on the issue. If he moves too far to the right on some of these issues in order to win the GOP primary, it will just make him unelectable in the general election.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

It was the first hit if you googled Rand's name since Friday. I count 24 articles from MSM that were negative. Bloomberg finally wrote a more balanced piece that came out this morning saying that Rand hasn't flip flopped.

Yeah, I see the Bloomberg article. And I see one from the Rachel Maddow Show on MSNBC. And the blog on Washington Post. And one from a European site called Pink News.

Maddow/MSNBC and WaPo are pretty much the usual haters, nothing to see here.

 

[whoisjohngalt]

Yeah, I see the Bloomberg article. And I see one from the Rachel Maddow Show on MSNBC. And the blog on Washington Post. And one from a European site called Pink News.

Maddow/MSNBC and WaPo are pretty much the usual haters, nothing to see here.

Yeah, but it's the articles at Reason, The Daily Beast, and Mediate that have me concerned. Those are all publications that lean to the right.

 

[Kotin]

Yeah, but it's the articles at Reason, The Daily Beast, and Mediate that have me concerned. Those are all publications that lean to the right.

You are blowing this up into something it just is not.. Pretty asinine

 

[acptulsa]

Yeah, but it's the articles at Reason, The Daily Beast, and Mediate that have me concerned. Those are all publications that lean to the right.

What do you propose be done about it? Do any of those sites fail to censor the snot out of comments?

 

[jmdrake]

Yeah, but it's the articles at Reason, The Daily Beast, and Mediate that have me concerned. Those are all publications that lean to the right.

The Daily Beast leans stupid. Reason has always sniped at the Pauls. Mediate barely registers on the radar. Let me know when WND, Newsmax, Freerepublic and/or Redstate has a problem with Rand's position on gay marriage and what the problem they are having is.

 

[jllundqu]

I don't particularly want to paste or link to any of the hit pieces and I'm not sure how to post the video link from my phone, but it's getting quite a bit of media attention and I've seen no mention of it here.

It sounds very much like Rand is doing some hardcore pandering to Evangelicals. In the video he seems clearly to say that the government has a role in defining marriage.

Even if what he was saying was consistent with the libertarian position; this looks awful to Independents and Millenials. I'm not going to withdraw my support over this, but my support is becoming increasingly tepid. He may still have my vote but he's losing my money and my time with stunts like this. Am I the minority?

Pander, Pander, Pander.... and pander was his nammeeooooo!

"Increase Defense Spending!" <Pander to Neocon Hawks>
"Moral Crisis!" <Pander to Social Cons>

I could list more... but I supported Ron Paul for precisely the OPPOSITE reason. Ron didn't pander. His passionate pricipled approach is what 'cured my apathy'... not this crap.

I can hear Collins and the like already.... "But but but... elecability!!!!"

I'm barely hanging onto the Rand Paul train, here. I'm about to fall off in all actuality. I'm not about to make viral videos or march in the snow or beat feet around neighborhoods for this 'go along to get along' BS.

And I don't want to hear the "Well he's the best we've got!" argument either... That logic don't hold with me. If Rand can't find some principled ground to stand on and he tries to please everyone, for votes.... he's already lost.

 

[Kotin]

Pander, Pander, Pander.... and pander was his nammeeooooo!

"Increase Defense Spending!" <Pander to Neocon Hawks>
"Moral Crisis!" <Pander to Social Cons>

I could list more... but I supported Ron Paul for precisely the OPPOSITE reason. Ron didn't pander. His passionate pricipled approach is what 'cured my apathy'... not this crap.

I can hear Collins and the like already.... "But but but... elecability!!!!"

I'm barely hanging onto the Rand Paul train, here. I'm about to fall off in all actuality. I'm not about to make viral videos or march in the snow or beat feet around neighborhoods for this 'go along to get along' BS.

And I don't want to hear the "Well he's the best we've got!" argument either... That logic don't hold with me. If Rand can't find some principled ground to stand on and he tries to please everyone, for votes.... he's already lost.

Great and I'm sure that feels great emotionally but do you know what that won't accomplish???

POLICY CHANGE!!!!! Do you want policy to change!? Or do you want to make viral videos and March in the snow??? Do you want someone as commander in chief who is Ron Paul's son with a proven record in the senate.. This should not be a question

 

[jllundqu]

I'm not really the "socially liberal fiscally conservative" libertarian type and don't really have a problem with these types of comments from Rand. That said, I understand that gay marriage is becoming increasingly popular in the United States, and Rand needs to be really careful about what type of rhetoric he uses on the issue. If he moves too far to the right on some of these issues in order to win the GOP primary, it will just make him unelectable in the general election.

Yep. I seem to remember an elder Paul saying, "We get our rights as individuals, not because we belong to certain groups." Gay marriage is not an issue, and should not be an issue for Rand. If gay men and women want to dedicate their lives to eachother and find a pastor, etc, to marry them, who is to stop them??

 

[jmdrake]

Pander, Pander, Pander.... and pander was his nammeeooooo!

"Increase Defense Spending!" <Pander to Neocon Hawks>
"Moral Crisis!" <Pander to Social Cons>

I could list more... but I supported Ron Paul for precisely the OPPOSITE reason. Ron didn't pander. His passionate pricipled approach is what 'cured my apathy'... not this crap.

I can hear Collins and the like already.... "But but but... elecability!!!!"

I'm barely hanging onto the Rand Paul train, here. I'm about to fall off in all actuality. I'm not about to make viral videos or march in the snow or beat feet around neighborhoods for this 'go along to get along' BS.

And I don't want to hear the "Well he's the best we've got!" argument either... That logic don't hold with me. If Rand can't find some principled ground to stand on and he tries to please everyone, for votes.... he's already lost.

Did you ever read what Ron Paul had to say about DOMA and Lawrence v. Texas? I'm guessing you haven't.