Rand Paul on The Alex Jones Show today

[Galileo Galilei]

I guess Rand must know what he's doing, but I just think that his association with AJ is the single biggest thing that will hurt him if he ever decides to run for President. You have to be very careful who you associate with if you have higher ambitions.

totally untrue. The biggest threat is idiots telling Rand who to do interviews with.

 

[specsaregood]

I guess Rand must know what he's doing, but I just think that his association with AJ is the single biggest thing that will hurt him if he ever decides to run for President. You have to be very careful who you associate with if you have higher ambitions.

I'd argue that the very media you seem to prefer would be the biggest thing that can hurt him. It isnt like they are above lying, smearing and ignoring principled constitutionalists.

 

[ronaldo23]

The Judge said that 9/11 didn't happen the way our government told us and that building 7 probably came down via controlled demolition... on AJ's show..

You can rationalize in your head all you want, but the media calls anybody who even questions the official story a truther.

The judge certainly said the former, but that is an incredibly general statement that probably many people believe. It doesn't imply a sinister controlled demolition theory...do you have a link where Napolitano claims it was via demolition? I don't know too much about the 9/11 truth movement, but I did see the movie "Loose Change", which was, well, one of the most poorly made films I have ever seen. Those two creators went on to npr to debate the editors of popular mechanics, and they weren't able to logically defend even one of their claims, and just resorted to yelling and name-calling. It was laughable to watch, and turned me off to 9/11 conspiracies, and Jones was an executive producer of the film.

Also, I think going on Alex Jones is both a good and bad thing. Jones is on our side, on a lot of political issues, but sometimes he really has crazy conspiracies that aren't backed up. Alex Jones is VERY friendly with known and convicted scam artist Kevin Trudeau, who is well known for manipulating people and their money. The last thing Rand needs is for him to be associated with 9/11 truthers, in the mainstream media.

 

[jct74]

YouTube - Senator Elect Rand Paul - Alex Jones Show - Interview on 12.10.2010
YouTube - Senator Elect Rand Paul - Alex Jones Show - Interview on 12.10.2010 (Part 2 of 2)

 

[ninepointfive]

I'd question anyone on this board as to where your true intentions lie, should you dislike Alex Jones.

You've either not:
1. paid enough attention to his show
2. read his homepage for current news
3. considered how sincere he is
4. listened to deep interviews of top notch current political figures including Rand and Ron Paul to name the most obvious
5. watched his movies promoting liberty

He's so spot on and defiant in the face of tyranny, that should you renounce him for being passionate and pissed off, or for the 9/11 attacks, and don't go to his website to review his material and see for yourself at www.infowars.com;

I will question your sincerity and lack of intelligent consideration.

 

[BamaFanNKy]

I'd question anyone on this board as to where your true intentions lie, should you dislike Alex Jones.

You've either not:
1. paid enough attention to his show
2. read his homepage for current news
3. considered how sincere he is
4. listened to deep interviews of top notch current political figures including Rand and Ron Paul to name the most obvious
5. watched his movies promoting liberty

He's so spot on and defiant in the face of tyranny, that should you renounce him for being passionate and pissed off, or for the 9/11 attacks, and don't go to his website to review his material and see for yourself at www.infowars.com;

I will question your sincerity and lack of intelligent consideration.

6. Questioned and researched many of the topics he's promoted and found them untrue.
7. Tired of him taking credit for other people's work as his own. (Personally he did it to me).

 

[dannno]

The judge certainly said the former, but that is an incredibly general statement that probably many people believe. It doesn't imply a sinister controlled demolition theory...do you have a link where Napolitano claims it was via demolition?

He said it was probably demolition, as the collapse video seems to demonstrate.

I can't watch youtubes at work, it may have been from this one (notice that is part 13.. maybes somebody else can help get the correct video posted):

YouTube - Judge Andrew Napolitano on The Alex Jones Show - 11.23.2010 part-13

I don't know too much about the 9/11 truth movement, but I did see the movie "Loose Change", which was, well, one of the most poorly made films I have ever seen. Those two creators went on to npr to debate the editors of popular mechanics, and they weren't able to logically defend even one of their claims, and just resorted to yelling and name-calling. It was laughable to watch, and turned me off to 9/11 conspiracies, and Jones was an executive producer of the film.

Wait, you said you saw "Loose Change".. which one? Loose Change 1, 2, Final Cut, Fabled Enemies or An American Coup?

AJ didn't get involved until Final Cut, so I assume that is the one you saw. That film is actually a great introduction to 9/11 truth, but it doesn't do a whole lot to prove the stuff about the Pentagon and WTC buildings. I recommend An American Coup and presentations by Richard Gage.. but if you were watching Final Cut for the sole purpose of looking into the buildings and Pentagon, I recommend watching it again and paying attention to the other content they provide.

As far as the Popular Mechanics debate, I didn't think it was bad as you claim, except that you have to remember that occurred before Final Cut and the evidence they were going over was from Loose Change 1 and/or 2. Some of the evidence that was brought up was, as they explained, some of the 'weaker' evidence they have which they included in the films to get some attention to the issues so it can be vetted. There is nothing wrong with disproving bits and pieces from those films, but the overall narrative of the official story is still BS.

Also, I think going on Alex Jones is both a good and bad thing. Jones is on our side, on a lot of political issues, but sometimes he really has crazy conspiracies that aren't backed up.

Actually AJ is pretty careful to back up his claims pretty thoroughly. Occasionally something might slip through.

 

[randolphfuller]

Are you thinking of J. Edgar Hoover?

 

[specsaregood]

I'd question anyone on this board as to where your true intentions lie, should you dislike Alex Jones.

You've either not:
1. paid enough attention to his show
2. read his homepage for current news
3. considered how sincere he is
4. listened to deep interviews of top notch current political figures including Rand and Ron Paul to name the most obvious
5. watched his movies promoting liberty

He's so spot on and defiant in the face of tyranny, that should you renounce him for being passionate and pissed off, or for the 9/11 attacks, and don't go to his website to review his material and see for yourself at www.infowars.com;

I will question your sincerity and lack of intelligent consideration.

6. Questioned and researched many of the topics he's promoted and found them untrue.
7. Tired of him taking credit for other people's work as his own. (Personally he did it to me).

8. Were really disgusted when he crashed a liberty event organized without his help, then proceeded to bullhorn over the organizers and later call them controlled opposition.

 

[Distinguished Gentleman]

I would have preferred that Rand didn't appear on his show for the simple reason that it provides ample ammunition for his numerous enemies.

1. Rand does a simple interview agreeing with Alex about economics.
2. Alex says something embarrassing later in the show without Rand.
3. Douche commentator mentions Rand's interview, spending most of the segment playing something embarrassing Alex said.
4. Unfairly associates Rand with statement he didn't make. O'reilly, Olberman, and the whole bunch do this to people all the time.
5. It doesn't matter that it's patently false and unfair to Rand and A.J. People don't make sense and perception is more important than reality in politics.

 

[sailingaway]

That's scary. I've listened to Jones' show a time or two and I'll admit that he's entertaining, but I just don't think that a United States Senator should be going on his show. This could really hurt Rand if he ever decides to run for President.

I don't think he wants to be so regularly there he takes on an association with AJ the way Ron has with Freedom Watch, however, I for one would think less of Rand if he refused to go on once elected after AJ battled for him against a couple of slurs by his opponent. One that comes to mind is when AJ got 'Conway cover up' to be number one in google (regarding Conway's brother's drug charge) instead of the nasty stuff the left was trying to drive up in google search against Rand. AT least, from what I could tell, that seemed to be emanating from infowars/prison planet so I assumed it was AJ.....

You don't have to pretend you agree with every position someone has to be decent to them.

 

[sailingaway]

I would have preferred that Rand didn't appear on his show for the simple reason that it provides ample ammunition for his numerous enemies.

1. Rand does a simple interview agreeing with Alex about economics.
2. Alex says something embarrassing later in the show without Rand.
3. Douche commentator mentions Rand's interview, spending most of the segment playing something embarrassing Alex said.
4. Unfairly associates Rand with statement he didn't make. O'reilly, Olberman, and the whole bunch do this to people all the time.
5. It doesn't matter that it's patently false and unfair to Rand and A.J. People don't make sense and perception is more important than reality in politics.

Oh, a number of blogs associated Rand with AJ because of his interviews and did mash up videos etc. TODAY a KY blog posted that Rand was going on with his '9/11 truther buddy', so called.

HOWEVER, if you let your opponents embarrass you away from your friends, you aren't showing much character, imho. Rand likely won't go on often, but to not go on at all after he was elected would be cheap, also imho.

 

[Distinguished Gentleman]

Oh, a number of blogs associated Rand with AJ because of his interviews and did mash up videos etc. TODAY a KY blog posted that Rand was going on with his '9/11 truther buddy', so called.

HOWEVER, if you let your opponents embarrass you away from your friends, you aren't showing much character, imho. Rand likely won't go on often, but to not go on at all after he was elected would be cheap, also imho.

I understand, and realize that I am too "practically minded" for most in these parts. It's simply my fear that now that we're a grown up movement, not enough caution is used when picking and choosing our battles.

 

[PatriotOne]

It's simply my fear that now that we're a grown up movement, not enough caution is used when picking and choosing our battles.

Yes. Fear is good. Many a battles have been won by those cowering behind the bushes.

 

[Distinguished Gentleman]

Yes. Fear is good. Many a battles have been won by those cowering behind the bushes.

Your metaphor would make perfect sense if we planned to storm the capital and take congress by force, using Nancy Pelosi as human shield. Politics, however, is nothing like war and everything like marketing.

If we planned to run a purely educational campaign, I suppose it would be different.

 

[PatriotOne]

Your metaphor would make perfect sense if we planned to storm the capital and take congress by force, using Nancy Pelosi as human shield. Politics, however, is nothing like war and everything like marketing.

If we planned to run a purely educational campaign, I suppose it would be different.

We ARE in a war with our government and they have the MSM as their allies to market THEIR candidates. Truthers have used cyber guerilla warfare against them and have been very effective. Ron and Rand go on AJ's show because they are dancing with the person (people) that brought them to the party...period. They know who their base is, where the bulk of their money is coming from, and who the real effective activists are. Truthers. Without them they would not be in the position they are today. Go ahead and be ruled by fear. That certainly would make "them" happy. Just stay out of the way of the brave patriots who are taking the bullets for you while you cower in fear.

 

[sailingaway]

We ARE in a war with our government and they have the MSM as their allies to market THEIR candidates. Truthers have used cyber guerilla warfare against them and have been very effective. Ron and Rand go on AJ's show because they are dancing with the person (people) that brought them to the party...period. They know who their base is, where the bulk of their money is coming from, and who the real effective activists are. Truthers. Without them they would not be in the position they are today. Go ahead and be ruled by fear. That certainly would make "them" happy. Just stay out of the way of the brave patriots who are taking the bullets for you while you cower in fear.

No offense, but a lot of us who consider ourselves activists are not truthers. I pointed out the contribution by AJ's listeners, but you shouldn't minimize what others contribute, either.

 

[PatriotOne]

No offense, but a lot of us who consider ourselves activists are not truthers. I pointed out the contribution by AJ's listeners, but you shouldn't minimize what others contribute, either.

I'm not minimizing anything. Truthers have pulled the heavy load all along and there would be no paul's in their positions today for you to support if not for the truthers. I haven't taken offense at anything you said but those who try to dissassociate the Pauls from the truthers can kiss our asses. Luckily the Paul's know where their bread is buttered and ignore the anti-truthers and continue speaking through their medium.

 

[dannno]

That's scary. I've listened to Jones' show a time or two and I'll admit that he's entertaining, but I just don't think that a United States Senator should be going on his show. This could really hurt Rand if he ever decides to run for President.

Maybe you should listen to him more. He advocates pretty much precisely the same principles as Ron Paul politically. He just gets into more of the nitty gritty stuff that is more cutting edge and controversial.

 

[Brett85]

Maybe you should listen to him more. He advocates pretty much precisely the same principles as Ron Paul politically. He just gets into more of the nitty gritty stuff that is more cutting edge and controversial.

I'm sure that I agree with most of his positions on the issues, but I'm not going to take anybody seriously who claims that world bankers are trying to kill off 80% of the world's population.