Rand Paul Confronted on Mitt Romney Endorsement by wearechange

[JohnGalt23g]

Wow, so you support the use of Drones in America? Figured that a Rand apologist would be on this side but I'm glad you told us all this.

Wonder if all the other Randy apologists feel the same way

So, since you oppose waterboarding, do you also think we should outlaw water?

 

[green73]

Are you wanting to ask him to reiterate every single thing he has every said?

Fair enough.

Make an appointment.

No. I'm saying Ron Paul would never treat someone like that. Since when is Rand shy and retiring about repeating himself?

 

[wongster41]

Ron's never answered the question of who wrote the newsletters. If WAC had simply gone with "Can you tell us why you endorsed Mitt Romney" without going immediately into a conspiracy land Rand might have given them some kind of answer before blowing them off. Tell me this. What do you possibly think might be gained for anybody by Rand talking about the Bilderberg group and this juncture?

Yes ron have actually, plenty of times before that interview. He said he didn't write them, and disavows them. People are up in arms right now from the endorsement and the alternative media is asking questions that the MSM aren't asking, there is nothing wrong with that.

 

[truthsaga]

Did anyone take into account that the Infowars / We are Change people are doing this to attract more audience to their brand? How hard would it of been for them to schedule a meeting with Rand on a number of topics and brought up the bilderberg question? Then, we can see his reaction - all I noticed from the start of the video is Rand greeting them and telling them to schedule an appointment.

If enough of us were in local positions and seated in Congress this endorsement would mean a lot more on the basis of principle, but we have someone representing us in the Senate and we want to cast him off for this? It's like having the title shot and calling the fight before it starts.. all the time everyone has put in has been wasted.

I am sure what everyone wants is Rand to spend 30 years isolated and being the NO vote in the Senate.

 

[AuH20]

Yes ron have actually, plenty of times before that interview. He said he didn't write them, and disavows them. People are up in arms right now from the endorsement and the alternative media is asking questions that the MSM aren't asking, there is nothing wrong with that.

For what purpose?? We Are Change has an agenda to portray to Rand Paul as an agent for an international cabal. All questions are funneled in that direction to make Rand Paul look bad no matter what he says. If he does agree with everything Radomski says he is later marginalized and put on the cover of Time as a kook, when he is locked in a fierce battle in the 2016 Republican primary. All our money is flushed down the toilet in an instant.

 

[PatriotOne]

Maybe everybody's controlled opposition. Maybe Alex Jones and the Pauls are staging all of this. Who knows? Doesn't change what I need to do.

I'll agree with that (except for the Paul part being opposition). It doesn't change what we need to do and I was pleased to see you not jump on the "Rand Paul is the Antichrist" bandwagon. Though some may disagree with what needs to be done. Alex and Co. are attempting to derail Rand and divide because we are over the target now. Controlled opposition has gone full monty trying to divide while trying to maintain "plausible deniability" at the same time.

Reading about how the hippy movement (free love, high on drugs all the time, anti-establishment, wears flowers in their hair, has sex in public) was inserted into the anti-war movement to create polarization of the conservatives and other regular people is interesting. Keep them infighting!).

 

[pcgame]

......

 

[LibertyEagle]

I have no problem with drones in general. I can foresee a day when drones are used to do work in rescue situations and disaster situations that is simply too hazardous for humans, and I don't want to preclude their existence. I just want the Fourth Amendment to keep pace with technology the Framers never could have imagined.

The Framers covered it quite fine.

4th Amendment:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

What concerns me the most are the exclusions that are in the bill. Please correct me if I am wrong, but as I recall, the language in the bill insisted on warrants, but did have exceptions to that rule. It is the exceptions that worry me.

 

[wongster41]

For what purpose?? We Are Change has an agenda to portray to Rand Paul as an agent for an international cabal. All questions are funneled in that direction to make Rand Paul look bad no matter what he says. If he does agree with everything Radomski says he is later marginalized and put on the cover of Time as a kook, when he is in the Republican primary in 2016. All our money is flushed down the toilet in an instant.

He's going to be marginalized later on anyways in 2016, the establishment will make sure of that, to think otherwise is just crazy. We've seen and know what the MSM, the GOP have done to Ron, what makes you think it'll be different for his son?

 

[LibertyEagle]

No. I'm saying Ron Paul would never treat someone like that. Since when is Rand shy and retiring about repeating himself?

Who said he was? He was busy, dude. Have you never been busy? He asked for Luke to call and make an appointment and that they would talk.

Why are you trying so hard to make something out of this?

 

[LibertyEagle]

He's going to be marginalized later on anyways in 2016, the establishment will make sure of that, to think otherwise is just crazy. We've seen and know what the MSM, the GOP have done to Ron, what makes you think it'll be different for his son?

So, your goal is to beat them to the punch and marginalize him right now?

 

[AuH20]

He's going to be marginalized later on anyways in 2016, the establishment will make sure of that, to think otherwise is just crazy. We've seen and know what the MSM, the GOP have done to Ron, what makes you think it'll be different for his son?

Rand plays it a lot closer to the vest than Ron. Even his opponent Trey Grayson bemoaned to a reporter that he was waiting for Rand Paul to make some highly controversial comment like Ron, but never did during the primary campaign. He even complimented Rand on his message discipline.

 

[Pisces]

Why should Rand answer questions about Romney being at Bilderberg when the evidence is really not clear that he was? Four anonymous people say they saw him, but the day they say he was there, he was actually in California doing his Solyndra photo-op. Rand would look like an idiot if he talked about this. Romney may be the Bilderberger's guy but there's no proof he was actually at the meeting and in fact the evidence against it is stronger than the evidence in favor of it. If Luke were a better journalist he would know this.

 

[jmdrake]

Yes ron have actually, plenty of times before that interview. He said he didn't write them, and disavows them. People are up in arms right now from the endorsement and the alternative media is asking questions that the MSM aren't asking, there is nothing wrong with that.

Ron has never answered the question of who wrote the newsletters. Saying he didn't write them and disavowing them is different. And Rand's already answered the question of why he endorsed Mitt Romney. He said before we even got close to this point that he would endorse the eventual nominee. He said when he was running for senator in KY that he would endorse his opponent Trey Grayson if he lost the primary. So for Rand not to endorse Mitt Romney now would be for Rand to break a promise. Is that what people want? I think it's good that WAC has Rand on record for saying that he knows about the Bilderberg group. Now people have to use their brains and figure some things out for themselves. If you're trying an undercover operation you aren't going to say what you really think on video.

 

[July]

I have no problem with drones in general. I can foresee a day when drones are used to do work in rescue situations and disaster situations that is simply too hazardous for humans, and I don't want to preclude their existence. I just want the Fourth Amendment to keep pace with technology the Framers never could have imagined.

People are still looking at the symptom, not the cause. The cause of the police state isnt drones, but the constant state of war/state of emergency, coupled with the subsidizing of companies who produce this technology--who must find and justify uses for it. Ron taught me that.

 

[wongster41]

So, your goal is to beat them to the punch and marginalize him right now?

I'm saying he should redeem himself and stand on principle like his father. Why cater to the establishment that have shut out the message of liberty and conservative values for so long?

 

[JohnGalt23g]

The Framers covered it quite fine.



What concerns me the most are the exclusions that are in the bill. Please correct me if I am wrong, but as I recall, the language in the bill insisted on warrants, but did have exceptions to that rule. It is the exceptions that worry me.

And yet, nothing in the 4th about one's vehicle on public roads. Plain text reading of the Constitution (and I assume we all believe in textualism) would not cover computer drives, as they are not made out of "paper". Now, we have had judicial decisions covering these, which is good. I for one would be happier if Congress participated in such upgrades. Which is what Sen Paul is doing... asking that Congress lead the way on this.

And we should always be concerned about exceptions to BOR protections, and always vigilant about them. But only the most foolhardy of us would argue against all time/place/manner restrictions on the First Amendment.

Unless of course you like people falsely shouting "FIRE!!" in a crowded theater...

 

[TomtheTinker]

Obomney 12 marches forward and what use to be known as the liberty movement sits on the interweb and bickers with their closest allies.


Rand is only one piece of the puzzle..suppport him if you want..wait and see if you will..turn your back on him if you must. STOP FIGHTING EACH OTHER!!!

 

[donnay]

The Rand apologists are out in full force.

Watch him with Glenn Beck.

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

Yeah that was some interview. Dr. Paul always praised the internet! Rand seems to think the unhappy supporters on the internet are rather small? Hmm...Interesting how he said this small group on the internet are these angry folks and are the ones preaching violence to him and his family? WTH? The extremist on the internet? That seems a wee bit exaggerated and quite disingenuous--but I expected nothing less, really.



Commonality? Even Doug Wead said in an interview this week; "There is nothing Romney can give em. Audit the Fed? You have got to be kidding, 80% of America wants to audit the fed. Asking Romney to audit the Fed is kind of like asking a 10 year old kid to eat an ice cream for me." Wead goes on to say, "Of course they won't really audit the Fed it will be some watered down phony version of auditing the Fed."

So who is lying? I do not believe this is rocket science, anyone paying attention can see the mixed messages.

I do question Rand's timing and how this message was delivered. Those who have been in the Ron Paul movement know, in their heart of hearts, Hannity was no friend to the liberty movement whatsoever!

If people would be honest with themselves for just a minute and break away from the false left/right paradigm, and realize the system is corrupt and to try and work within the system is futile. It has been tried before and failed miserably. Dr. Paul used the system to bring forth ideas, and ideas that are bullet proof. Liberty is worth fighting for, and to make compromises to gain a little liberty or recoup what has already been taken by the corrupt system is a fools errand.

"Those who do not study history are DOOMED to repeat it."

 

[LibertyEagle]

I'm saying he should redeem himself and stand on principle like his father. Why cater to the establishment that have shut out the message of liberty and conservative values for so long?

Watch how he votes. That is what I am going to do. The proof will be in the pudding, so to speak.