Rand Paul Just Outed Himself

[cajuncocoa]

???

that was a win?

Gotta understand....Reagan is the mascot for Team Red. Some here are just cheerleaders for the team.

 

[angelatc]

???

that was a win?

Maybe you missed it, but Reagan won his second term in a landslide.

 

[Anti Federalist]

Because what we really want - public opinion to sway in our direction - isn't going to happen between now and 2016.

But see, outside of the interventionist dead enders, it is.

There is a wave of non interventionism sweeping across the country.

I don't know how deep or how wide it is, but if you want to be called a "leader", when the winds of change align in your favor, you seize them and "boldly go where no man has gone before".

Not sink back into repeating the tired platitudes and bromides that caused the mess in the first place.

 

[pcosmar]

Unless i'm completely missing something with what he said?

Apparently so.

Why should Russia be punished at all?
And what makes it any of the US's business??.

 

[ZENemy]

Bingo!It doesn't matter what a politician says, only what they do.

Like Endorsing Romney over his own father?

 

[cajuncocoa]

I can't help but notice you don't have a better plan.....

Wrong. The better plan is to call even "our" candidates out when they stumble. But the groupies here don't have the stomach for it.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

I thought part of that "essential work" was to continue to preach sound foreign policy of the Ron Paul brand while putting the rhetoric into action. It's the primary issue that sets us apart from every other GOP candidate IMO.

No, rather it's "preach sound foreign policy of the Ron Paul brand OR [put] the rhetoric into action"

Someone who preaches pure non-interventionism will never be in a position to enact it.

Rand is preaching a message as non-interventionist as possible without compromising his ability to get elected (and then actually shift policy toward non-interventionism).

 

[Natural Citizen]

You can't change the weather on the battlefield.

Well. That's not exactly true anymore, you know. But I see what you were trying to say though.

Speaking of which. You know that agribusiness, like it has been successful in doing where other coups have taken place recently, was moving in on Ukraine too before the shtf. True story. But we haven't got to that part yet. That'll be a hoot. It's "foreign policy" too, you know. Stay tuned. Foreign Policy isn't always just what the media and some politicians would like to narrate it to be and where it's comfortable for them where just getting elected is the bees knees. Nope. Uh-uh. BRISCA nations (India and the like) will soon jump on the human rights violations bandwagon that we are seeing from China as they, themselves, run abreast with the propaganda machine that we see from RT and the like toward western oligarchs and plutocrats who are at the heart of this turmoil. Yep. These BRISCA nations will become major players in the non-gmo industry which will absolutely be competitive with western agribusiness who, through trade agreements like the tpp which opens the door for American corporations to invade the sovereinty of these nations, comfortably and without legal recourse, inserts itself repeatedly and consistently in the many recent coups we've seen and that drives this and other recent phenomenon across the globe. It's going to get jiggy alright.

 

[angelatc]

Isn't Rand's position here basically the libertarian position?

There are ways to sanction a nation without violating the NAP. Like simply refusing to do business with or trade with countries you don't agree with. The freezing of assets, high tariffs/import taxes, etc are the more aggressive form of sanctions that would violate NAP. The impression I got from the article Rand wrote initially was him saying that since we disagree with what Russia is doing, the best way to handle them would be simply to stop doing business with them and let them feel the pain of our absence. I didn't get the impression that he was calling for aggressive sanctions necessarily.

Unless i'm completely missing something with what he said?

This ant-Rand stuff will only get worse as we get closer to the election. It was really bad when Ron ran - this will be 10x's worse. Bryan shoud do us a favor and open up another forum that is entirely unlinked from this one, and run it like the other candidates run theirs, meaning that non-supporters get banned.

This kind of crap just gives the opposition talking points.

 

[VBRonPaulFan]

Apparently so.

Why should Russia be punished at all?
And what makes it any of the US's business??.

You could turn that around on an individual basis and say "why should we stand up for others when their liberty is attacked? what makes it any of OUR business?"

It's perfectly fine to let people know you don't agree with what they're doing in a non-violent way, when you really want to let them know. That was basically the gist of what I got from Rand's article.

 

[pcosmar]

Maybe you missed it, but Reagan won his second term in a landslide.

And you think that was a good thing?

Huge Debt
FEMA Camps
War on Drugs
Expanded Police State
Iran Contra

and those just off the top of my head,,, from memory.

 

[NIU Students for Liberty]

Besides being crude and rude, you are also positioning brute over brains.

I'm not the one who claimed peace was a message for "pussies". And really, brute? How is my argument "brute" when I'm not the one who supports this "America is the greatest nation on earth and Russia needs to back off if it knows what's good for them" crap?

 

[cajuncocoa]

No, rather it's "preach sound foreign policy of the Ron Paul brand OR [put] the rhetoric into action"

Someone who preaches pure non-interventionism will never be in a position to enact it.

Rand is preaching a message as non-interventionist as possible without compromising his ability to get elected (and then actually shift policy toward non-interventionism).

So you're counting on him to be a liar. Nice.

 

[angelatc]

No, rather it's "preach sound foreign policy of the Ron Paul brand OR [put] the rhetoric into action"

Someone who preaches pure non-interventionism will never be in a position to enact it.

Rand is preaching a message as non-interventionist as possible without compromising his ability to get elected (and then actually shift policy toward non-interventionism).

She has been a Rand-hater for years now. Nothing will change her mind.

 

[NIU Students for Liberty]

Double Post

 

[cajuncocoa]

This ant-Rand stuff will only get worse as we get closer to the election. It was really bad when Ron ran - this will be 10x's worse. Bryan shoud do us a favor and open up another forum that is entirely unlinked from this one, and run it like the other candidates run theirs, meaning that non-supporters get banned.

This kind of crap just gives the opposition talking points.

Why wait for Bryan to do it? Start your own Team Red board (no liberals allowed!!)

 

[phill4paul]

This ant-Rand stuff will only get worse as we get closer to the election. It was really bad when Ron ran - this will be 10x's worse. Bryan shoud do us a favor and open up another forum that is entirely unlinked from this one, and run it like the other candidates run theirs, meaning that non-supporters get banned.

This kind of crap just gives the opposition talking points.

You're the one that flaunts the "Love it or leave it," rhetoric. What's stopping you? Or would you rather just incessantly bitch?

 

[pcosmar]

This kind of crap just gives the opposition talking points.

And this crap is going to push me to find Democrats that are worth supporting.

I will be seriously looking to third party choices.

 

[Anti Federalist]

No, not at all. Rand is simply attempting to neutralize the neocons. He isn't pushing for a war, and Rand would not support a war.

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

Punished, how?

And why is it the United State's role to "isolate" Russia.

(Ridiculous and impossible on the face of it, unless you are willing to put half of Europe in the dark, using military force. Then the shit would hit the fan, which is the OP's point)

 

[cajuncocoa]

She has been a Rand-hater for years now. Nothing will change her mind.

LOL @ "Rand-hater". The groupies take it very personally when you criticize their crush.