Rand Paul Just Outed Himself

Joined
Aug 31, 2007
Messages
117,550
Rand Paul Just Outed Himself

by eric • March 17, 2014

http://ericpetersautos.com/2014/03/17/rand-paul-just-outed/

Rand Paul is one of them.

Maybe they got to him. Maybe they have the negatives. Or maybe he was just never one of us, no matter how much some of us may have hoped he might be. It doesn’t matter why. What does matter is that Rand Paul has added his voice to the neocon warble that could very well lead the world to a nuclear war over . . . Crimea.

It’s the Sarajevo of 2014.

Why the ruckus? Power politics, of course. There is oil in them that hills, for one. Well, natural gas. Lots of it. Oceans of it, in fact. All set to be sold to Europe for other-than-dollars. This is an affront the Petro-dollar’s puppets in the Offal Office cannot abide. They went Medieval on Saddam – and then, Muammar – for precisely this reason.

And will do so again.

The United State (singular on purpose) would be wrecked if any major player got away with trading energy without trading it for dollars. Putin threatens to do this. Ergo, Putin must go. The problem – for you and me and everyone else caught in the middle of this maelstrom – is that unlike Saddam or Muammar – Vladimir does have weapons of mass destruction. The real deal, too. Not a handful of low-yield first-gen atomic M80s, either. And he has the means to send them our way. This – and the fact that a serious white person such as ex-KGB Colonel Putin holds the launch codes ought to give a sane person pause.

It was thought – briefly – that Rand Paul was sane.

Clearly, he is not.

In a just-published Time article, the son of the usually-sensible Ron Paul writes: “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.” Italics added for obvious – depressing – reasons.

And then, this:

“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.”

Except Putin did not invade Ukraine, the people of Crimea voted overwhelmingly to join Russia (self-determination, anyone?) and the “international community” is a rhetorical fiction deployed by warmongers like George W. Bush, Barack Obama and – now – Rand Paul.

By joining them, he’s proved he can’t beat them. Or doesn’t want to beat them. Or can’t be trusted to try.

Regardless, he’s given all of you fair warning. In the immortal words of The Chimp:

Fool me once, shame on… shame on… won’t get fooled again.
 
Last edited:
I love it, you have all the Neo-Cons saying he is too soft and an 'isolationist,' and then people on here stating he is being too much of a neo-con.
 
Well, I still trust him, but I guess that I can't really say too much to defend the somewhat neoconish disposition that he is demonstrating here.

I guess that all I can really say is that the guy is walking the tightrope of ages, and I can't really fault him too much if perhaps some of the rhetoric is a little bit imbalanced.

Again, I still trust him as a well intentioned human being that generally shares our values as non-interventionists...
 
  • Like
Reactions: PRB
Either walking your military into another country is right or it's wrong. It isn't right for Russia and wrong for the U.S. You can't take this side on principle today and that side on principle tomorrow, because if you do you have no more genuine principles than a liberal. Crimea may have voted to secede from the Ukraine, and that may have even been a legitimate vote. But that doesn't mean Russia has a right to occupy before the people of the Ukraine even have time to digest that vote. It isn't unreasonable to expect them to forbear until the Ukranians have time to decide if separation is unquestionably the answer, and make preparations for it if it is--such as, perhaps, helping those who don't want anything to do with Russia to relocate.

Of course, maybe Russia is just reacting to the EU being too proactive in this thing as well. But the first wrong doesn't make it illegitimate to object to the second wrong...
 
Well, I still trust him, but I guess that I can't really say too much to defend the somewhat neoconish disposition that he is demonstrating here.

I guess that all I can really say is that the guy is walking the tightrope of ages, and I can't really fault him too much if perhaps some of the rhetoric is a little bit imbalanced.

Again, I still trust him as a well intentioned human being that generally shares our values as non-interventionists...

Agreed 100%. We won't get a candidate elected with Ron Paul's non-interventionist rhetoric.
 
Sen. Rand Paul: U.S. Must Take Strong Action Against Putin’s Aggression

Sen. Rand Paul
March 9, 2014

In an op-ed for TIME, Senator Rand Paul argues that if he were President, he would take a harder stance against the Russian President for his actions: "Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine is a gross violation of that nation’s sovereignty and an affront to the international community"

Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine is a gross violation of that nation’s sovereignty and an affront to the international community. His continuing occupation of Ukraine is completely unacceptable, and Russia’s President should be isolated for his actions.

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.

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.

This does not and should not require military action. No one in the U.S. is calling for this. But it will require other actions and leadership, both of which President Obama unfortunately lacks.

I recommend a number of specific and decisive measures to punish Putin for his ongoing aggression.

Economic sanctions and visa bans should be imposed and enforced without delay. I would urge our European allies to leverage their considerable weight with Russia and take the lead on imposing these penalties. I would do everything in my power to aggressively market and export America’s vast natural gas resources to Europe.

Continued...
 
Last edited:
I know I'm disappointed. Is that what a foreign policy "realist" would say? I don't know. I'll have to check with the realists.

I really don't think this is a ruse just to get support from the R hawks and neo-Trots, as I've seen so many people say. But even if that's true, that kind of thing doesn't sit well with me either.

"It's always possible to stick to your principles, if you have any."
--Isabel Paterson

That's one of the reasons I love Ron. You never have to wonder if he's saying things for political expediency or to garner support from different factions. He says what he believes-based on principles-always. And how much easier it must be to do that!
 
Last edited:
That's one of the reasons I love Ron. You never have to wonder if he's saying things for political expediency or to garner support from different factions. He said what he believed, based on principles, always. And how much easier it must be to do that!

Much easier. Ron would never address Putin's premature ejaculations without addressing whether the EU is getting ahead of itself as well.

But, you know, it's also easier never to be president, and leave it to the crooks to do it instead...
 
Agreed 100%. We won't get a candidate elected with Ron Paul's non-interventionist rhetoric.

So its ok for Rand to lie, switch positions? Since "we wont get a candidate elected" we should support liars? We should support liars like Obama?

ANYTHING to get elected right?

"No guys, ONCE I get in there, Ill do the things you want...ONCE I get in, but to get in, we MUST do some wrong"

"he is just saying that now, we gotta LIE and change positions to get him in there and THEN we will have freedom."

Damn Ive heard this all before.

BLAH BLAH SAVE IT RAND!

(Directed to Rand and Politics, not you Angel)
 
Last edited:
I know I'm disappointed. Is that what a foreign policy "realist" would say? I don't know. I'll have to check with the realists.

I really don't think this is a ruse just to get support from the R hawks and neo-Trots, as I've seen so many people say. But even if that's true, that kind of thing doesn't sit well with me either.

"It's always possible to stick to your principles, if you have any."
--Isabel Paterson

That's one of the reasons I love Ron. You never have to wonder if he's saying things for political expediency or to garner support from different factions. He says what he believes-based on principles-always. And how much easier it must be to do that!

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.
 
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.
 
So its ok for Rand to lie, switch positions?

ANYTHING to get elected right?

"No guys, ONCE I get in there, Ill do the things you want...ONCE I get in, but to get in, we MUST do some wrong"

"he is just saying that now, we gotta LIE and change positions to get him in there and THEN we will have freedom."

Damn Ive heard this all before.


BLAH BLAH SAVE IT RAND!

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.
 
Back
Top