Rand Paul is a genius

jmdrake

Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2007
Messages
51,901
I posted this elsewhere, but I think it deserves its on thread. I expressed concerns about Rand's strategy in 2010 back when it wasn't "cool" to do so. Then I stayed someone in the middle when others were either ready to "throw him under the bus" or "throw his critics under the bus" post the Romney endorsement. I've been "cautiously optimistic" that Rand Paul wasn't selling out, but was following a careful strategy. I believed that Ron is aware of that strategy and either directly approves of it or is willing to let it play out with minimal interference. I believe yesterday proved the strategy is working. Here's why:

Yesterday I saw Justin Raimondo, Michelle Bachmann, Reince Priebus, Ann Coulter, Code Pink and the ACLU all cheer Rand Paul on. It's not about elected democrats, only one or two were helpful to Rand yesterday to my knowledge. It's about their constituents. If there was a republican in the Whitehouse you wouldn't see as many republicans standing with Rand. Rand Paul yesterday managed to engage the libertarian, progressive and republican grassroots as well as the GOP mainstream. I've never seen that happen before. At least not to that extent. I was listening to Mark Levin last night. At first it sounded like Levin was criticizing Rand because he was talking about how terrorists don't deserve "due process". But then I realized what was going on. Levin was drawing a distinction between terrorists who were an imminent threat, and Americans in the U.S. who pose no imminent threat (the "sitting at a cafe' scenario) and blasting Eric Holder for not immediately saying that under that scenario the government couldn't authorize a drone strike. He went on to praise Rand Paul, Ted Cruze and Mike Lee. The only caveat is that he found a way to sneak in praise for Marco Rubio for the "best ever response to a state of the union address" because he "emphasized liberty and free markets". I'll admit I haven't watched Rubio's speech beyond his "gulp" moment (I guess I have to now), but I found it odd that Levin had to find a way to pimp Rubio even though Rubio hasn't been involved in this particular stand against tyranny. That's what I expect going forward. People like Levin using "Yeah Rand's great. But my guy is great to and he can win." argument. But I don't think that will care the day. At least I hope not.
 
I agree.

Best yet, there is still plenty of time for rand to build on this even further. Last night really showed who was willing to stand up for liberty, and i am willing to bet that THAT will become more and more popular as time goes.

I get a real strong feeling that we have only just seen the beginning of Rand.

I am so pumped
 
I agree.

Best yet, there is still plenty of time for rand to build on this even further. Last night really showed who was willing to stand up for liberty, and i am willing to bet that THAT will become more and more popular as time goes.

I get a real strong feeling that we have only just seen the beginning of Rand.

I am so pumped

Yep. Add Cenk of the Young Turks as another progressive commentator who has criticized Rand in the past but praised Rand Paul yesterday. If Rachel Maddow does the right thing and praises Rand Paul for this I will kiss her in effigy.
 
Rand is a genius, and he drew a line that needed to be drawn and one that his father was unable to draw.

The distinction between times of war and times of peace, identified terrorist combatants and US citizens, etc is stark.

In a way, I feel Rand invoked "letters of marque and reprisal" when discussing the use of drones, overseas, during wartime on enemy combatants. It's like going after a pirate or enemy that is not identified to one nation. Perhaps, Constitutional.

Further, he made it clear drones on US citizens was NOT Constitutional.

Rand accomplished more than I could ever have hoped for.
1) He may have unified the fractured republican party (perhaps, behind himself.)
2) He may have done what Obama did to the republicans in 07 and 08 (That is, make the other party seem out of touch and hawkish.)
3) He achieved bipartisan support
4) He made himself a national figure
5) He gave a masterclass on the Constitution and thrust it to the forefront of the debate.
6) He showed the establishment he could lead, articulate, and take important issues head on without misstep.

Make no doubt about it; Rand is now a serious contender for 2016, and possibly a favorite. We're also due for an overdue political realignment.

In trend analysis, one would show all signs as positive here.
 
I'd be interested to know if anyone listened to Rush yesterday - or today - and can tell us what he's saying if anything? I would rather not listen to him and it's impossible to find his show from yesterday without giving him money(I think he has enough)
 
While there was probably some political maneuvering behind his epicbuster (I just made that up), his feelings were sincere.

You know damn well most if not all of those other clowns decided to jump in for face time once they realized that this was becoming a monumental event.
 
I've also sat on the fence concerning Rand. I'm just not one to appreciate partisan politics on either side of the aisle. I didn't really have anything against him. He just hadn't done much to promote the issues that most concern me. I did like his stand against the TSA. Yesterday, however, Rand rocked! He didn't try to make it about partisanship. He illustrated the issues very well. And he stood firm on the side of Constitutional limits on government. I was very impressed yesterday.
 
Rand is a genius, and he drew a line that needed to be drawn and one that his father was unable to draw.

The distinction between times of war and times of peace, identified terrorist combatants and US citizens, etc is stark.

In a way, I feel Rand invoked "letters of marque and reprisal" when discussing the use of drones, overseas, during wartime on enemy combatants. It's like going after a pirate or enemy that is not identified to one nation. Perhaps, Constitutional.

Further, he made it clear drones on US citizens was NOT Constitutional.

Rand accomplished more than I could ever have hoped for.
1) He may have unified the fractured republican party (perhaps, behind himself.)
2) He may have done what Obama did to the republicans in 07 and 08 (That is, make the other party seem out of touch and hawkish.)
3) He achieved bipartisan support
4) He made himself a national figure
5) He gave a masterclass on the Constitution and thrust it to the forefront of the debate.
6) He showed the establishment he could lead, articulate, and take important issues head on without misstep.

Make no doubt about it; Rand is now a serious contender for 2016, and possibly a favorite. We're also due for an overdue political realignment.

In trend analysis, one would show all signs as positive here.

#6 is what impressed me yesterday. I learned a lot I did not know about Rand. Other than Cruz, he was by far the most eloquent and "Presidential" of anyone who spoke, and do it for hours on end with no tele-prompter, was not a talent I knew he possessed (but I do now). His father was not a great debater, but I can't wait to see this guy debate neocons down the road. His calm, reassuring, intelligent and coherent manner of communicating is intoxicating. How did an eye doctor obtain such oratory skills??
 
I've also sat on the fence concerning Rand. I'm just not one to appreciate partisan politics on either side of the aisle. I didn't really have anything against him. He just hadn't done much to promote the issues that most concern me. I did like his stand against the TSA. Yesterday, however, Rand rocked! He didn't try to make it about partisanship. He illustrated the issues very well. And he stood firm on the side of Constitutional limits on government. I was very impressed yesterday.

Well, he did try to stop the NDAA, challenging McCain. He also lobbied against CISPA. So far I think hes highlighting important issues.
 
Well, he did try to stop the NDAA, challenging McCain. He also lobbied against CISPA. So far I think hes highlighting important issues.

I didn't really follow him much on the NDAA issue. I did hear him speak at one of Ron's campaign events where the NDAA was a major topic, but I was pretty focused on the presidential campaign in Iowa at that point.
 
All true. But Rand was also helped by Obama being president. For one it meant his fellow republicans were less likely to bushwhack him for not "taking one for the team." For another, Obama has been so blatant with "fast and furious", trying to grab guns, buying billions of rounds of ammunition and buying MRAPs for use on the home front, that republicans are starting to believe he might actually try something. Making the "Well at least this shouldn't be done to American citizens" argument was harder when fellow republicans didn't believe "their guy" would ever use this stuff against American citizens. (Stupid I know, because "their guy" wouldn't always be in the Whitehouse.)

Rand is a genius, and he drew a line that needed to be drawn and one that his father was unable to draw.

The distinction between times of war and times of peace, identified terrorist combatants and US citizens, etc is stark.

In a way, I feel Rand invoked "letters of marque and reprisal" when discussing the use of drones, overseas, during wartime on enemy combatants. It's like going after a pirate or enemy that is not identified to one nation. Perhaps, Constitutional.

Further, he made it clear drones on US citizens was NOT Constitutional.

Rand accomplished more than I could ever have hoped for.
1) He may have unified the fractured republican party (perhaps, behind himself.)
2) He may have done what Obama did to the republicans in 07 and 08 (That is, make the other party seem out of touch and hawkish.)
3) He achieved bipartisan support
4) He made himself a national figure
5) He gave a masterclass on the Constitution and thrust it to the forefront of the debate.
6) He showed the establishment he could lead, articulate, and take important issues head on without misstep.

Make no doubt about it; Rand is now a serious contender for 2016, and possibly a favorite. We're also due for an overdue political realignment.

In trend analysis, one would show all signs as positive here.
 
Friends of mine have brought it up, one even asking why the only senator who did something ballsy and heroic was Rand Paul. Rather than jump down his throat and rattle on, I pointed him to the John Cusack article, since Cusack is a Democrat, where Cusack basically asked the same question: where were the Democrats on this. Figure finding some common ground would be a good start.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/03/06/liberal-actor-on-gop-led-filibuster-over-drones-for-gods-sake-where-are-democrats/

One of Cusack's tweets:

AG say its ok to kill us citizens–and other bad guys- but trust us we’re the good guys..
how’d that play out through history mr holder…
pay no attention to the man behind that curtain
the great and powerful O has spoken…
 
Friends of mine have brought it up, one even asking why the only senator who did something ballsy and heroic was Rand Paul. Rather than jump down his throat and rattle on, I pointed him to the John Cusack article, since Cusack is a Democrat, where Cusack basically asked the same question: where were the Democrats on this. Figure finding some common ground would be a good start.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/03/06/liberal-actor-on-gop-led-filibuster-over-drones-for-gods-sake-where-are-democrats/

One of Cusack's tweets:

Yep! This is a time for building bridges
 
Back
Top