Rand Paul Confronted on Mitt Romney Endorsement by wearechange

[jmdrake]

they will never get it . they will just keep regurgitating what they hear from those 3 people i mentioned earlier . i wont mention them again because everytime i do i get a -rep from John F Kennedy III & jmdrake but i get like 5 +reps from random others , so it would be rep whoring .

It's funny that I get nothing but +reps from LibertyEagle lately, so I don't think she's buying into the crap you're selling. It's one thing to disagree with people like Alex Jones or Luke Rudowski. If you've followed what I've said in this thread (instead of being an ass) you'd see that I've not been agreeing with this attack by Luke. Finally as for the whole "rep" thing, you're the rep whore. You neg repped me long before I neg repped you. I don't know what problem is, but you need to let go of your hate before it eats you up.

Edit: Actually I do know. You're as much of a sycophant "fan boy" as the Alex Jones supporters you hate so much. Lot's of people have legitimately criticized what Rand did. Lew Rockwell, Tom Woods, Chuck Baldwin, all of them have expressed grave concern. The first video Alex Jones released was a fair criticism of both Ron and Rand Paul over the handling of the situation. Some of the latest stuff that has come out of Infowars.com is crap. But that doesn't change the fact that there are fair criticisms. Once you grow up you'll realize that.

 

[LibertyEagle]

The Rand apologists are out in full force.

Watch him with Glenn Beck.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNWOkGBFYyw

Yeah, thanks. I thought that was a FANTASTIC interview. Great job, Rand!

 

[LibertyEagle]

It's funny that I get nothing but +reps from LibertyEagle lately, so I don't think she's buying into the crap you're selling. It's one thing to disagree with people like Alex Jones or Luke Rudowski. If you've followed what I've said in this thread (instead of being an ass) you'd see that I've not been agreeing with this attack by Luke. Finally as for the whole "rep" thing, you're the rep whore. You neg repped me long before I neg repped you. I don't know what problem is, but you need to let go of your hate before it eats you up.

Edit: Actually I do know. You're as much of a sycophant "fan boy" as the Alex Jones supporters you hate so much. Lot's of people have legitimately criticized what Rand did. Lew Rockwell, Tom Woods, Chuck Baldwin, all of them have expressed grave concern. The first video Alex Jones released was a fair criticism of both Ron and Rand Paul over the handling of the situation. Some of the latest stuff that has come out of Infowars.com is crap. But that doesn't change the fact that there are fair criticisms. Once you grow up you'll realize that.

You and I disagree about Alex Jones. I think it is likely he works for the government. We also disagree about 9-11. Besides those two things, I think we agree on most everything else.

 

[HigherVision]

I've been thinking and I think Rand's strategy is bad. I think it's better to stay pure, even if it means sacrificing some short term pragmatic benefit. I don't think it's worth the demoralizing of the liberty movement in order to do so. We have to be in this for the long haul and force the establishment to bend in our direction, not vice versa. I'll still support Rand in the good that he does but he'll never be an icon like his father.

 

[radiofriendly]

Thanks for the response. I have interviewed Adam when I was doing interviews with RevPAC--and also later covered the veterans march. I had a debate with Adam in person about the Super Brochures--of course he's capable of lively and passionate debate--I appreciate that. He's still a terrible person to take political advice from -- and 'super brochures' are a great example of bad political advice.

Looks like we just have different opinions about taking these guys seriously.

What a mature start to your post....



What selective editing of the video - I haven't noticed any selective editing on any of the videos? Perhaps you could point out evidence for this claim before making accusations.

I'm pretty indifferent to the whole 'truth movement', I don't particularly follow the whole Alex Jones-Bildeberger saga. I'm more interested in Austrian Economics and the philosophy of liberty than the "IT'S A CONSPIRACY!" side. I don't have anything against them, in fact, I feel that they're an ally.

I fail to see, though, the harm in WeAreChange and Alex Jones, nor do I feel that they have any alterior motive. I think that Luke Radowski (sp?) is merely a college kid with a camera trying to make a name for himself in a field that he's passionate about. He hasn't violated the non-agression principle, so what's the problem? In fact, suggesting that he has a 'bias intent' seems pretty similar to those who cry "Conspiracy!".



Has he? There's that brief video from two years ago, but I can't find any other ones. I'm happy to be corrected so perhaps you would post the videos to support the claim that they've conversed "several times".



Laughable. No offence but to say Adam Kokesh is in an 'attack mode' is ridiculous. You don't think politicians should be held to account? You don't think it's okay to disagree with Rand's endorsement? Get rid of the emotive language, Adam Kokesh eloquently presented his distaste with Rand. It's not an 'attack' to disagree with someone. I don't know about WeAreChange other than this video but I'll agree with you that Alex Jones seems in a bit of an attack mode - he seems to have gone out his way to blaming everyone and anyone, including Ron Paul himself, for this endorsement and overstate his outrage and generally kick up more of a fuss than it's worth.

Also, I don't see how you can group Adam Kokesh in with Alex Jones and WeAreChange. Adam has a completely different style and the subject which he focuses on is completely different. Adam Kokesh isn't a truther, he's an ancap (not mutually exclusive, I know, but the content of Adam Versus The Man is about the voluntarist philosophy and current affairs, not the "exposing the NWO"). In fact, I would suggest that Adam is more comparable to Stefan Molyneux and the folks at FreeTalkLive than Alex Jones and WeAreChange.



Well, thanks for the words of wisdom o wise sage.



....and support those who endorse tyranny? I'm no conspiracy theorist, but that doesn't mean I find them anything but harmless. Slightly deluded, a bit caught up and gullible - yes - but at least they don't try and deny me my right to self-ownership. The same cannot be said for policians like Rand and Romney.




I think you should take a vacation yourself - to PorcFest where you can meet Adam and air your complaints to his face. Btw, he is a reasonable gent who enjoys debate so don't be put off by his arms.

 

[jmdrake]

You and I disagree about Alex Jones. I think it is likely he works for the government. We also disagree about 9-11. Besides those two things, I think we agree on most everything else.

We disagree on MLK as well. And personally I don't think a "conspiracy about a fake conspiracy" makes sense. I doubt the government wants people to believed there was a government conspiracy involved in 9/11 if there wasn't one. The idea that AJ could be "poisoning the well" to keep people from finding the truth about 9/11 is of course possible. I am disappointed in the what Alex has allowed other writers to put on Infowars.com. I think his initial point that the Pauls have a good record but that the strategy they're pursuing is risky and the implementation has been poor is a fair criticism that's been echoed by people that to my knowledge are not conspiracy theorists.

 

[PatriotOne]

We disagree on MLK as well. And personally I don't think a "conspiracy about a fake conspiracy" makes sense. I doubt the government wants people to believed there was a government conspiracy involved in 9/11 if there wasn't one. The idea that AJ could be "poisoning the well" to keep people from finding the truth about 9/11 is of course possible. I am disappointed in the what Alex has allowed other writers to put on Infowars.com. I think his initial point that the Pauls have a good record but that the strategy they're pursuing is risky and the implementation has been poor is a fair criticism that's been echoed by people that to my knowledge are not conspiracy theorists.

Did you watch this video yet? Start around 9:15, watch how Alex says he thinks "they" have something on him and Rand is being blackmailed and his gut tells him..he then laughs saliciously implying it's some sexual dalliance. Then goes on to say "they" have really dug into things and he thinks they are blackmailing Rand. Then goes on to imply he's on the verge of going to the dark side, etc. Quite an interesting video...honey, honey, poison all the way through but particularly starting around 9:15 to the end.

 

[RDM]

Did you watch this video yet? Start around 9:15, watch how Alex says he thinks "they" have something on him and Rand is being blackmailed and his gut tells him..he then laughs saliciously implying it's some sexual dalliance. Then goes on to say "they" have really dug into things and he thinks they are blackmailing Rand. Then goes on to imply he's on the verge of going to the dark side, etc. Quite an interesting video...honey, honey, poison all the way through but particularly starting around 9:15 to the end.

That IS the MO in politics and used extensively by the Oligarchy to keep the "scheme" going and those that try to "buck" the scheme ALWAYS and almost always face detrimental consequences i.e. political career killed, jail, personal humiliation, death, etc.

 

[abruzz0]

I'll support a presidential run for Rand in 2016 if and only if he stays on course with what he's done in the Senate so far; i.e., bills against drones, the TSA, NDAA, Patriot Act, etc...but if he starts drifting into neo-con land, then it won't matter, cuz by then he will have pissed away all his support.

Whether for or against Rand at the moment, we're all liberty principled people who are willing to make varying degrees of compromise. Overall, Rand has done a marvelous job for us in the Senate, with the exception of a couple things like his endorsement of Romney and the Iran sanctions. That aside, though, he's done a great job and overall is on target with advancing the liberty movement.

Our job is to support him and also keep him on the straight and narrow for liberty.

Also beware that trying to pull him too close may end up pushing him away from us. Keep the balance.

 

[jmdrake]

Did you watch this video yet? Start around 9:15, watch how Alex says he thinks "they" have something on him and Rand is being blackmailed and his gut tells him..he then laughs saliciously implying it's some sexual dalliance. Then goes on to say "they" have really dug into things and he thinks they are blackmailing Rand. Then goes on to imply he's on the verge of going to the dark side, etc. Quite an interesting video...honey, honey, poison all the way through but particularly starting around 9:15 to the end.

Which video? You didn't post a link. The OP video is only 6 minutes long. Anyhow I don't have time to watch all of the hours of video Alex Jones has done post the Rand Paul endorsement. The fact that he's allowed Nimmo and Rudkowski to post garbage is bad enough. Then again this all seems to be helping Rand in a way. People who might still be pissed at Rand for the endorsement and wondering what the hell is going on might feel more sympathy because of the hatchet journalism. It could be staged in more ways than one.

 

[PatriotOne]

Which video? You didn't post a link. The OP video is only 6 minutes long. Anyhow I don't have time to watch all of the hours of video Alex Jones has done post the Rand Paul endorsement. The fact that he's allowed Nimmo and Rudkowski to post garbage is bad enough. Then again this all seems to be helping Rand in a way. People who might still be pissed at Rand for the endorsement and wondering what the hell is going on might feel more sympathy because of the hatchet journalism. It could be staged in more ways than one.

Sorry...skip to 9:15.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=BDtDMfehv6M

 

[loveshiscountry]

Thanks for the response. I have interviewed Adam when I was doing interviews with RevPAC--and also later covered the veterans march. I had a debate with Adam in person about the Super Brochures--of course he's capable of lively and passionate debate--I appreciate that. He's still a terrible person to take political advice from -- and 'super brochures' are a great example of bad political advice.

Looks like we just have different opinions about taking these guys seriously.

A terrible person? Like when he says to support Ron Paul? I think you went a little overboard.

 

[cmstealth]

I believe he might have actually answered the question if it was one of the first two posed. Busy man, he answered two, not going to answer a third. I understand.