Rand Supports Some Foreign Bases, Big Difference from His Dad

[talkingpointes]

What makes Amash better than Rand? Can you link me to a source which says Amash wants to close all foreign military bases?

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2013/02/5_sound_bites_from_justin_amas.html

Would you like to keep going ?

 

[LibertyEagle]

For those that are going to split hairs deceiving and misleading is lying. Go ahead and tell yourself that it's for the benefit of us. You sound like the same people you're fighting against -- where all ends make means and their is no overriding principle or goal other then POWER.

TP, he is leading the ignorant down the path to the salvation of liberty. They cannot see the end from here; we've tried that before. Rand is getting them to think about things they haven't thought about in a long time. Thus far, it's been pretty darn brilliant, in my opinion. But, time will tell and we should all keep our eyes open.

 

[talkingpointes]

Almost everything Rand has done, Amash has done.

Here's the Amash vs. Rand debate summed up:

1: Rand endorsed "flip flopper RINO" Romney. Amash didn't.
TRUE. Amash did not. But he certainly did support Romney to the same extent Rand did - he just didn't call it an endorsement. For example, Amash co-chaired Arab Americans for Romney, praised Romney's vice presidential pick immediately after he was announced whom he considers a friend and is proud of (a day prior to slamming the LP nominee), declared he would help the Republican nominee after the convention and like Rand, campaigned for Romney at Romney 2012 events. Not to mention Amash donating $500 to the McCain 2008 presidential campaign after donating to the Ron Paul campaign earlier that year.

2. Rand "sold out" on the Ron Paul foreign policy - backed Iran sanctions and a US-Israeli alliance. Amash didn't.
FALSE. Amash believes "Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons poses a serious threat to our country's security" and supports economic sanctions against Iran and voted for an Iran sanctions bill, saying that he does "not believe that sanctions, as a general matter, are unconstitutional or unwarranted in particular circumstances.". He also voted for military foreign aid for Israel and thinks Israel is "our closest friend in the region." The congressman supported the killing of Osama Bin Laden without a trial.

3. Rand "joined the globalists" in supporting free trade agreements. Amash didn't.
FALSE. Amash voted in favor of the same three Obama-backed free trade agreements Rand Paul did, citing that he believed they "reduced government interference in trade" - the United States-Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement Implementation Act, the United States-Panama Trade Promotion Agreement Implementation Act and the United States-Korea Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act.

I support Rand Paul and Amash. To some extent, I even support many of the above decisions. I don't know why the Rand haters rally around Amash even though Amash will never win the presidency and agrees with Rand on almost everything.

Compromise. I have said it before and I will say it again. Your name is perfect in every way. Although in a few years you might add this too it compromisedandlostbothsecurityandliberty.

 

[talkingpointes]

TP, he is leading the ignorant down the path to the salvation of liberty. They cannot see the end from here; we've tried that before. Rand is getting them to think about things they haven't thought about in a long time. Thus far, it's been pretty darn brilliant, in my opinion. But, time will tell and we should all keep our eyes open.

Time will tell, and in my case I won't lose anything. All the people going behind Rand are going to skip out on local politics again and try for the national stage that people CLAIM IS RIGGED. Is it or not ?

 

[compromise]

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2013/02/5_sound_bites_from_justin_amas.html

Would you like to keep going ?

Can you please point out to me the part where he says he wants to close all foreign military bases?

"We have way too many bases overseas. There are hundreds of military bases around the world. I don't think we need to be doing that. When you look at Europe right now, they spend a very low percentage of their (gross domestic product) on defense, and that's because the United States is still subsidizing their defense.

"Long after the Cold War has ended, why are we basically providing defense for all of Europe?"

 

[compromise]

Compromise. I have said it before and I will say it again. Your name is perfect in every way. Although in a few years you might add this too it compromisedandlostbothsecurityandliberty.

Nice ad hominem. Now come up with an actual response to that.

 

[talkingpointes]

What makes Rand entirely different from his father is that he is in it too win it. Not in it too change it. Rand isn't pretending anything in my eyes. This is who he is. He is posturing himself to revive the party -- not the movement. When Matt is telling people not to converse and debate and too shut up -- you know something is seriously wrong.

 

[LibertyEagle]

What makes Rand entirely different from his father is that he is in it too win it. Not in it too change it. Rand is pretending anything in my eyes. This is who he is. He is posturing himself to revive the party -- not the movement. When Matt is telling people not to converse and debate and too shut up -- you know something is seriously wrong.

Yes, because it is oh so much better to be in it to lose it.

Rand believes he can change things through his office. He saw the mistakes his father made that kept him from being able to do that, until maybe the very end of his tenure.

"the movement", by itself, can't win squat. Come on, you know that. Rand is after waking up those people in the Republican Party who could not hear what Ron was saying. Rand is speaking to them in terms they understand and can relate to and slowly leading them to water. Ron tried to shove their heads in the water bucket and it did NOT work with most. Rand is using a different strategy. Give him a chance, will ya.

 

[lib3rtarian]

Haven't we had enough with Bush and Obama? Honestly, I don't know what Rand would actually do when he got into office, and neither do you. Just because his last name is Paul doesn't mean he won't sell out. I'm betting that he will be better than any alternatives, so I support him. Honestly, I don't even see the need to insult him. I honestly think he's a man of integrity who is telling us what he believes. It just so happens that that isn't what Ron Paul believes. I like Ron Paul much better, but I still support Rand.

I supported Ron Paul with all my heart, but in hindsight, I realize why he didn't get anywhere with his candidacy. This country is neck deep in statism brought about by about a 100 years of big gubmint, I understand that it cannot be rolled back overnight. Ron and the LP wants to roll it back overnight, which sounds very nice to OUR ears, but sounds crazy to everyone outside our circle. This is why Ron didn't win, and this is also why the LP hasn't won dogcatcher in over 40 years of its existence.

For even the basic libertarian principles to be put into actual practice, we need to WIN and Rand is our best chance. Otherwise all of us armchair warriors and purists will be sitting here, in this bubble, forever discussing Bastiat and Rothbard's sideburns.

 

[compromise]

What makes Rand entirely different from his father is that he is in it too win it. Not in it too change it. Rand isn't pretending anything in my eyes. This is who he is. He is posturing himself to revive the party -- not the movement. When Matt is telling people not to converse and debate and too shut up -- you know something is seriously wrong.

Already changed your tone. Before it was "what makes Rand different from Amash", now it's "what makes Rand different from his father".

 

[talkingpointes]

Nice ad hominem. Now come up with an actual response to that.

Too bad you're so ashamed of your actual qualities you cower and back away from them and use psuedo-intellectual arguments to change the subject. Your entire premise in politics is too win - is it not ?

 

[talkingpointes]

Already changed your tone. Before it was "what makes Rand different from Amash", now it's "what makes Rand different from his father".

I didn't change anything Amash actually talks to his supporters, explains himself, and doesn't hide behind party rhetoric. He has actual qualities and principles. That's why when he does something bad he doesn't have his sock puppet army come and shut people up.

 

[talkingpointes]

Can you please point out to me the part where he says he wants to close all foreign military bases?

If you would like me to spoon feed you from google I won't oblige if it means one less child around here.

I will do you one better - I'm at work and I'm just going to ask him myself.

 

[robert68]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/01/rand-paul-military-bases_n_2981368.html

And it turns out Paul is not opposed to keeping military bases in Iraq, or in that part of the world, for the foreseeable future. When he sat down a few weeks ago with a few reporters at an event hosted by National Review, I brought up a report that morning in The Wall Street Journal about the CIA taking responsibility for U.S. operations in Iraq from the Defense Department, and asked Paul if that was a good model for him, or whether he wanted "total removal" of U.S. forces from the country.

Paul said he supported something "in between all that."

If he said that, he sounds no different than Obama when he ran for President.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Too bad you're so ashamed of your actual qualities you cower and back away from them and use psuedo-intellectual arguments to change the subject. Your entire premise in politics is too win - is it not ?

Are you against winning our country back? I'm not. To do that, you have to change hearts and minds. Rand is going after those that Ron could not reach.

 

[LibertyEagle]

You know, guys, if you hate Rand so much, what are you doing in his subforum? This subforum is for helping Rand; not ripping him to shreds. You're not trying to find out anything. You made your minds up some time ago.

 

[compromise]

Too bad you're so ashamed of your actual qualities you cower and back away from them and use psuedo-intellectual arguments to change the subject. Your entire premise in politics is too win - is it not ?

If I were ashamed, I would not have chosen this username. I would have called myself "ultimatelibertypatriot" or something. I am pragmatic, not an ideologue. And yes, I do want to win. Rand can win and he's 95% Ron Paul. I'll take that over having a 100% guy who will get nowhere politically.

The only real subject I've touched on here is people like yourself claiming Rand and Amash are totally different even though they have almost identical records, both rhetorically and in votes. You were the one who originally changed subject by comparing Rand and Amash.

 

[talkingpointes]

Are you against winning our country back? I'm not. To do that, you have to change hearts and minds. Rand is going after those that Ron could not reach.

Whos mind has he changed ?(other then fracturing the movement along with that asshole benton, people are tired of the fucking lies and deception) If he wins the presidency is he not going to be controlled just like he is NOW ALREADY. Wether by bankers or public opinion. He is not his own man. Sorry.

 

[misean]

I love how this is controversial to anyone. What? I mean really? What? This isn't surprising, newsworthy, or even a remotely unreasonable position for Rand to have.

 

[FSP-Rebel]

Time will tell, and in my case I won't lose anything. All the people going behind Rand are going to skip out on local politics again and try for the national stage that people CLAIM IS RIGGED. Is it or not ?

Wrong and I can only speak for myself but I would imagine that those that back Rand are politicos and are engaged on every level. My county's C4L is very active on local, state and federal issues and it's packed full of Rand supporters.