Rand Paul Just Outed Himself

[Cap]

Rhetoric that panders/supports the war mongers will cost lives. Rand's rhetoric could very well tip public opinion toward war.

 

[ClydeCoulter]

The way I see it, is that Rand has to act presidential in order to convince many that he can do it.

Now, what is that?

Ron has worked to get the message out about the "Golden Rule" and Liberty, and it seems that NOW is the time for it to spread. Look at the "peoples" choice for Syria, No War!

Now, is the time for Rand to find a way to deliver the message of Liberty with a firm hand and in a face saving way. Remember him talking about face saving diplomacy not so long ago? He needs to deliver a "face saving" way for America to become peaceful and non-hypocritical.

 

[Barrex]

HA HA HA. This again.

"We should have bases in Europe but Europeans should pay for it"- Rand Paul
Translated: It is not gonna happen.

HA HA HA

This urge to attack, spit on libertarian instead of real enemies of freedom like L. Graham is retarded. Oh you are doing something good? let me spit in your face destroy everything you are trying to do... you know I am doing it for your own good. That kind of people disgust me.

 

[ZENemy]

“It is America’s duty to condemn these actions in no uncertain terms. It is our role as a global leader to be the strongest nation in opposing Russia’s latest aggression."


Gross

 

[fisharmor]

Well, let's just say that as someone who lives about 20 miles from the location where about a quarter of their ICBMs are headed,
and as someone who knows that, thanks to non-proliferation treaties, they're all 1960's tech missiles that have an accuracy rated in miles,
and as someone who knows what a MIRV is,
I can't say this really improves my opinion of Rand Paul.

Hey apologists, do me a favor and just pick the letter of your pre-programmed illogical response.

A) If you don't like it, you can just move!
B) This is all just a ruse. He's a sleeper agent who is going to steer the 1/4 mile deep crater that used to be Washington into a new era of liberty.
C) Fuck you fisharmor, you're a hater anyway so we're not losing a vote if you get incinerated.

 

[Natural Citizen]

I think that what Senator Paul needs to understand better is that Russia has been mishandled for quite some time. If he doesn't want to have a pow wow with papa Paul about the relevant history then maybe use the www like the rest of us to recall our memories. He's clearly running with the model that is being propped up by msm and some politicians who seek to impose the TPP for the benefit of their corporate masters against the sovereignty of these countries. I really don't truly think that Paul has a firm grasp on the issue at all. But if he does...and he may...then that's a problem in itself because it reveals some things that probably wouldn't have been otherwise. Of course, it's not just him. There are many in political office who stand to have transparency ...oh...dare I say forced upon them?

How the West lost Putin: It didn’t have to be this way

And what is really happening here is the same thing that has happened with many other countries who have fallen prey to the looting of their countries by western money men and special interests. The same players who stand to benefit from the Trans Pacific Partnership agreement...including the media who also stand to benefit greatly from the TPP. This is why we see the extent of the malfeasance from them that we do regarding any accurate reporting on the issue in scope. Except this time they picked the wrong kid to try to steal milk money from.

There will be no true sanctions against Russia because most of the free thinking world understands clearly, like has happened with many other countries, their elected governments and their resources being pillaged, what is happening here.

You know, to understand Putin's history in his own country, one should consider that what really must peeve plutocrats and oligarchs who narrate the context of western media and some of narrative from many of our politicians is that Putin was able to end the rape of Russia by its own oligarchs from within his own ranks. Which is entirely another aspect of this but maybe best saved for another day.



I had posted this around here some place. Perhaps in the "Media Malfeasance" thread. I don't remember.

Anyhoo....

Distorting Russia How the American media misrepresent Putin, Sochi and Ukraine

“The history of this degradation is also clear. It began in the early 1990s, following the end of the Soviet Union, when the US media adopted Washington’s narrative that almost everything President Boris Yeltsin did was a “transition from communism to democracy” and thus in America’s best interests. This included his economic “shock therapy” and oligarchic looting of essential state assets, which destroyed tens of millions of Russian lives; armed destruction of a popularly elected Parliament and imposition of a “presidential” Constitution, which dealt a crippling blow to democratization and now empowers Putin; brutal war in tiny Chechnya, which gave rise to terrorists in Russia’s North Caucasus; rigging of his own re-election in 1996; and leaving behind, in 1999, his approval ratings in single digits, a disintegrating country laden with weapons of mass destruction. Indeed, most American journalists still give the impression that Yeltsin was an ideal Russian leader.

“Since the early 2000s, the media have followed a different leader-centric narrative, also consistent with US policy, that devalues multifaceted analysis for a relentless demonization of Putin, with little regard for facts. (Was any Soviet Communist leader after Stalin ever so personally villainized?) If Russia under Yeltsin was presented as having legitimate politics and national interests, we are now made to believe that Putin’s Russia has none at all, at home or abroad—even on its own borders, as in Ukraine.

“Russia today has serious problems and many repugnant Kremlin policies. But anyone relying on mainstream American media will not find there any of their origins or influences in Yeltsin’s Russia or in provocative US policies since the 1990s—only in the “autocrat” Putin who, however authoritarian, in reality lacks such power. Nor is he credited with stabilizing a disintegrating nuclear-armed country, assisting US security pursuits from Afghanistan and Syria to Iran or even with granting amnesty, in December, to more than 1,000 jailed prisoners, including mothers of young children.”

 

[Anti Federalist]

All I know is that dovetailing (talking like a pussy) on a big adversary will make him toast instantly in this GOP primary especially when he's one of the shorter peeps on stage. I'm seeing it as him balancing his position in his own words rather than letting the hawk pieces do it for him on their own terms as we saw last week numerous times.

And that is one of the most truthful, and therefore saddest, statements on this I've seen yet.

Let's just elect President Camacho and be done with it...

 

[Hyperion]

I wish he would apply his father's foreign policy. Non-interventionism has never been more en vogue in recent history.

 

[jtstellar]

let me get this straight

so you guys are actually arguing over personalities and "images" over what the words actually mean, what actions would be entailed from this, military invasion? blockade? sanctions? or just nothing? /facepalm i find people whining more when seasons change and body is irritated from seasonal fatigues, like i said, people really aren't too much different from animals. this is hopeless. at least the larger america is growing smarter while this place shrinks.

 

[vita3]

It's time to expose (STOP) the Neo-Cons driving the out of control Foreign Policy bus off the cliff... not cower to them

Come on Rand'

 

[Gaddafi Duck]

None of this is news.

One can hope he is a libertarian Trojan horse. Disguised to be more politically palatable to the masses, only to rip out the statism by the roots.

Regardless, it's hopeless to change the system. Even if Rand was navigating the electability waters prudent enough to become president, little good could come of it. It's the Ring of Power, and only Sauron, evil, is the master. All those good intentioned fall into darkness...you cannot use force to make good, and that is what Rand would have to do.

 

[TaftFan]

He should hire me as an adviser. (half joking) His advisers from the start crafted a position that had to be changed multiple times and eventually into something I doubt he agrees with.

This is what I would have had him do:

He should have taken a pro-democracy position from the start, allowing Crimea and the rest of Ukraine to decide their own fate, while condemning Russian intervention. The punishment for Russia should be simply framed as developing our own energy resources, while declining to place sanctions on Russia (for obvious reasons).

 

[cajuncocoa]

Agreed 100%. We won't get a candidate elected with Ron Paul's non-interventionist rhetoric.

If they can't express Ron Paul's non-interventionist rhetoric, what's left for which to call them "our candidate"?

 

[devil21]

What Time article? The one from a week ago that's already been hashed, rehashed and then hashed some more? And who the hell is Eric Peters and why should I give a shit what he thinks? He doesn't even link to the Time article. A cursory review shows he bashes Rand whenever he gets the chance.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...ke-Strong-Action-Against-Putin%92s-Aggression

Enough with damn knee jerk reactions over MSM edited articles about Rand. Gah!

 

[cajuncocoa]

We voted for Bush because he talked the non-intervention talk, and he turned around once in office and did exactly the opposite. I'm going to give Rand the benefit of the doubt, because he is really the only chance there is.

He isn't calling for military action - everything else is just noise.

"We" who? I didn't vote for him.

 

[Anti Federalist]

let me get this straight

so you guys are actually arguing over personalities and "images" over what the words actually mean, what actions would be entailed from this, military invasion? blockade? sanctions? or just nothing? /facepalm i find people whining more when seasons change and body is irritated from seasonal fatigues, like i said, people really aren't too much different from animals. this is hopeless. at least the larger america is growing smarter while this place shrinks.

Aside from being wrong, (this was from just a few months ago, after being remaining the same since Jan. 2008 - Most users ever online was 4,645, 12-05-2013 at 12:57 AM) what's your problem here?

Rand said:

“Putin must be punished for violating the Budapest Memorandum, and Russia must learn that the U.S. will isolate it if it insists on acting like a rogue nation . . .Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine a gross violation of that nation’s sovereignty and an affront to the international community.”

That could have come right out of the mouth of Karl Rove or Bill Kristol.

I find that to be a problem.

 

[cajuncocoa]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to ZENemy again.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

You're getting a politician. Clearly you're not ready to face reality yet, which is that Ron Paul's foreign policy doesn't win elections.

Yup. That speaks volumes about The Electorate and The System, doesn't it?

 

[pcosmar]

Anti-Federalist, Rand can't run for president if he takes the side of Putin.

Why?

 

[cajuncocoa]

Well, let's just say that as someone who lives about 20 miles from the location where about a quarter of their ICBMs are headed,
and as someone who knows that, thanks to non-proliferation treaties, they're all 1960's tech missiles that have an accuracy rated in miles,
and as someone who knows what a MIRV is,
I can't say this really improves my opinion of Rand Paul.

Hey apologists, do me a favor and just pick the letter of your pre-programmed illogical response.

A) If you don't like it, you can just move!
B) This is all just a ruse. He's a sleeper agent who is going to steer the 1/4 mile deep crater that used to be Washington into a new era of liberty.
C) Fuck you fisharmor, you're a hater anyway so we're not losing a vote if you get incinerated.

I think the correct answer is "C" since you didn't provide a choice for "all of the above"