Rand Paul votes YEA on Confirming Hagel

Feeding the Abscess said:
This one is all on Rand. He put his foot in the Cruz/Israel first water, jabbed libertarians and realists by strawmanning their positions, and then ultimately voted to confirm Hagel. Daniel Larison put it best: Rand managed to handle these votes and statements in a way that maximized annoyance with him from every side. If you're going to piss off your base, you better gain something from another base to make up for it.

In short, Rand was trying to play chess and got caught playing checkers.
Click to expand...
I agree with this.


IMO, what's happening on Rand's Facebook (and in the comments section of the Blaze article) is exactly what I expected if/when Rand took an action that opposed what Beck/Hannity/Levin listeners thought he would due to the rhetoric he was/is using to attract those audiences to him.

I don't care about Hagel...he's no more or less what I would expect from an Obama appointment. Actually, I think Obama could do a lot worse. But Rand gave his word that he would not stand in the way of presidential appointments, and for sticking to that, I applaud him.
 
Last edited:
What was Rand thinking? Isnt this the Jewnited States of American-Israel?
 
K466 said:
Well if he voted for Kerry might as well vote for Hagel...
Click to expand...

Did you not see how the entire GOP took a stand against Hagel? That means the GOP will see Rand Paul as a traitor. That's not the best way to win the nomination.
 
FrankRep said:
Says 1% of the vote.

Do you support the "Principles" of Chuck Hagel?
Click to expand...


He isn't frothing at the mouth at the idea of going to war with Iran, and while he isn't one of us, he's certainly better than I had expected to get.

In that respect, I do respect the principles of Chuck Hagel. What were you hoping for?
 
angelatc said:
He isn't frothing at the mouth at the idea of going to war with Iran, and while he isn't one of us, he's certainly better than I had expected to get.

In that respect, I do respect the principles of Chuck Hagel. What were you hoping for?
Click to expand...


The "Principles" of Chuck Hagel


H.J.Res. 114: Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002
- Chuck Hagel: Yes

S.J.Res. 23: Authorization for Use of Military Force
- Chuck Hagel: Yes

S. 1438: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002
- Chuck Hagel: Yes

H.R. 3162: Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT ACT) Act of 2001
- Chuck Hagel: Yes

H.R. 5005: Homeland Security Act of 2002
- Chuck Hagel: Yes

S. 1927: Protect America Act of 2007
- Chuck Hagel: Yes

Chuck Hagel is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.

Chuck Hagel scored a 44% on the Constitutional Voting Index

Endorsed by Zbigniew Brzezinski

Endorsed by Barack Obama
 
I guess I'm really out of touch with Talk Radio nowadays. I really don't understand why these people are going nuts.
 
AuH20 said:
One man swimming in a sea of stupidity:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_..._of_defense_rand_paul_s_flip_flop_on_the.html
Click to expand...
I love it when Rand fights back!

“Speaking for myself only, I do not support Rand Paul and have not for quite some time now,” said Ryan Langer, who leads the University of Northern Iowa’s Young Americans for Liberty chapter, a pro-Ron Paul organization. “In my opinion, while he may share his father's last name, he certainly doesn't share his principles, the Hagel vote just being further evidence of that.”

Rand Paul flat-out rejected that characterization. “I will say to anybody from the libertarian side who wants to believe that Hagel is the next coming of Harry Browne that they need to read a little more about his past,” he said. (Browne, the two-time Libertarian Party nominee for president, blamed 9/11 on an “insane” American foreign policy.) “Hagel’s been a promoter of the draft. Not a very libertarian idea. He’s been a promoter of U.N. peacekeeping troops around the world, and intervention. He doesn’t like unilateral intervention, but he’s fine with group intervention around the world. He voted for the PATRIOT Act. He voted for the Iraq War.”
Click to expand...
 
FrankRep said:
The "Principles" of Chuck Hagel


H.J.Res. 114: Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002
- Chuck Hagel: Yes

S.J.Res. 23: Authorization for Use of Military Force
- Chuck Hagel: Yes

S. 1438: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002
- Chuck Hagel: Yes

H.R. 3162: Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT ACT) Act of 2001
- Chuck Hagel: Yes

H.R. 5005: Homeland Security Act of 2002
- Chuck Hagel: Yes

S. 1927: Protect America Act of 2007
- Chuck Hagel: Yes

Chuck Hagel is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.

Chuck Hagel scored a 44% on the Constitutional Voting Index

Endorsed by Zbigniew Brzezinski

Endorsed by Barack Obama
Click to expand...

And if Hagel gets dismissed, who do you think he was going to appoint????? Back to square one. There was no leverage.
 
FrankRep said:
I can only assume that since you support "Principles over Party/nomination/winning" that "Principles" led you to support Chuck Hagel. Otherwise, "Principles" had nothing to do with your decision.
Click to expand...
The principle in question is the one where Rand said he would not stand in the way of a presidential appointment. I don't care about Hagel (and I certainly never said that I support him...you're putting words in my mouth there). That said, if Hagel didn't get confirmed, Obama would likely send up someone even worse.
 
Last edited:
EBounding said:
I guess I'm really out of touch with Talk Radio nowadays. I really don't understand why these people are going nuts.
Click to expand...

Because they have been conditioned to "go nuts" over nonsense like this.
 
I view this entire debacle as the Free Republic's Iranian Sanction moment. Number one, you are not going to stop Hagel or someone like him appointed. Number two, the alternative could be much worse.
 
EBounding said:
I guess I'm really out of touch with Talk Radio nowadays. I really don't understand why these people are going nuts.
Click to expand...

Life must be good!

I'm convinced Talk Radio politics are all for unhinged people on either side of the isle.
 
AuH20 said:
Because they have been conditioned to "go nuts" over nonsense like this.
Click to expand...

It really is like a switch was flipped and they truly believe Israel/America is headed for imminent collapse now. It's kind of scary.
 
LOL reading the comments at The Blaze, what a bunch of unhinged wingnuts. ZOMGOSH teh muzzies are gonna take over!111!11 Our military will be gutted! When 2016 rolls around, these people will be painted as fanatics while Rand will look sane and moderate for having voted to confirm Hagel.
 
seyferjm said:
LOL reading the comments at The Blaze, what a bunch of unhinged wingnuts. ZOMGOSH teh muzzies are gonna take over!111!11 Our military will be gutted! When 2016 rolls around, these people will be painted as fanatics while Rand will look sane and moderate for having voted to confirm Hagel.
Click to expand...

Isn't The Blaze actually supposed to be a "libertarian" website?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

PAF
Vance post on boat strike ‘really ticked me off,’ Rand Paul says
Replies
1
Views
320
Occam's Banana
Occam's Banana
Brian4Liberty
  • Featured
Rand Paul on Big, Beautiful Bill
Replies
4
Views
324
Brian4Liberty
Brian4Liberty
jct74
Is Rand Paul eyeing a 2028 presidential run?
2 3
Replies
40
Views
978
jmdrake
jmdrake
Brian4Liberty
  • Featured
Sen Rand Paul on Meet The Press 9/21/25
Replies
1
Views
1K
Brian4Liberty
Brian4Liberty
jct74
Sen. Paul Urges 'Repercussions' for Spying on Gabbard
Replies
0
Views
253
jct74
jct74
Back
Top