I personally think that if Rand loses people like you with votes like this, he has only himself to blame. You certainly shouldn't receive any blame or criticism for what you're saying.
Senate to vote on Iran resolution on Wednesday
- Thread starter tsai3904
- Start date
I personally think that if Rand loses people like you with votes like this, he has only himself to blame. You certainly shouldn't receive any blame or criticism for what you're saying.
Christian Liberty
Member
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2013
- Messages
- 19,707
Out of curiosity, where do you stand right now?
Its tough for me but between this, the drone comment, the "We shouldn't legalize drugs", the whole thing about "Striking a balance"... well, I got excited for a little while because of the filibuster but I think DC got to him. I really don't think he's the same person he was in the 90's. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if Ron Paul is unsure of his true intentions either. He's a politician, we should deal with him as such.
Christian Liberty
Member
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2013
- Messages
- 19,707
And to the absolute Rand-defenders (TC: I'm not talking to you, whether you still support Rand or not, you've criticized him plenty of times including here) Whatever happened to the whole "Speak like a neocon, vote like a liberty candidate" argument? Looks like Rand speaks AND votes like a neocon... And your defense now is "It doesn't matter"?
Tell me how that's not freaking pathetic.
Tell me how that's not freaking pathetic.
I'm not sure. I'll probably look at his record in its totality. I wish we could find someone better than Rand to run for President who can actually win, but unfortunately we don't seem to have any better options at the moment. I think that Amash is too young to run, and I don't see who else could really run who could stop Rubio and actually win. But, it just seems to me like votes like this will simply dampen all of the enthusiasm for Rand's campaign and hurt his fundraising. I just really don't understand why he thinks it will help him politically to basically be "Rubio-lite" on foreign policy issues.
Christian Liberty
Member
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2013
- Messages
- 19,707
Don't drag Ron into this. He may be being generous to his son but he's a true supporter of liberty. Walter Block has talked to Ron Paul before about Rand not being a libertarian and Ron Paul was apparently embarassed that Block brought it up in the context it was brought up in, but he could not disagree. Ron Paul knows better, but he doesn't want to hurt his son. What am I going to complain about? That Ron Paul is too nice to his own family? Oh please. Leave the real champion of liberty out of this and let's talk about the traitor...
My how far we've come since Ron ran for President in 2012. And certainly not in a good way.
Christian Liberty
Member
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2013
- Messages
- 19,707
Fair enough. We all have our sliding scales. I'm personally choosing to apply Romans 3:8 in this context. I can't do evil so good may come of it. While I certainly think Rand Paul would be less horrible than Rubio, that's all I can really say now. I think Rand will get even worse if he actually gets to a general election. The average voter is "moderate", aka statist, not libertarian leaning. I think there's still more education to be done before we can get anyone we can really trust. I don't expect perfection but I'm not going to vote for somebody who supports war and murder. At this point I think I was probably wrong to ever support (Though I didn't vote for him, I couldn't have) Gary Johnson as well. If all the candidates suck in '16, I'll proudly write in Laurence Vance as the ultimate middle finger to the neoconservatives and those who just can't seem to fight against them (Rand, I'm looking STRAIGHT at you there.)
Christian Liberty
Member
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2013
- Messages
- 19,707
I wish Ron would run again in 2016. I don't really expect him to do that at 81, but heaven knows we need someone with real principle.
Did this vote go to the House yet? Does it ever? Will Amash and Massie vote against it? Have they already?
The house hasn't voted on it, and I don't know when or if they will. But I can guarantee you that both Amash and Massie will vote against it.
Im convinced you're just a troll sowing division. Thanks for the neg rep schooling me on Ron, btw. Definitely, thanks for your help there...Im new here.
Now, back to fucking reality....
Ron Paul: Rand and I Are About 99%. People Try to Drive Wedges Between Rand and Me
Ron Paul said:
Last edited:
Lol. Some people will just defend Rand no matter what he does. I still haven't said that I won't support him in 2016, but his vote today was absolutely horrendous and should be condemned by everyone who has any principles at all. It was as bad as it gets.
please get out I bet you would have also flipped your shit when Ron voted not to condemn Israel for destroying Iraqs nuclear reactors.
rand was the only one to vote against preemptive war with Iran, and believes containment is the best method for dealing with Iran he has made this very clear, so is obvious he does not see a strike on Irans nuclear reactors as a legitimate form of self defense from the Israelis, again he said so him self in the speech where he voted 99-1 against preemptive war with Iran http://youtu.be/mFip8TclifU?t=8m11s that even if they one day get a nuke, we would not declare war on them and instead contain them, this however doesn't mean that he is against Israel taking action into their own hands, and just like how Ron voted NOT to condemn Israel for attacking Iraq's nuclear reactors in 1981, should Israel do the same this time around with Iran, is pretty clear Rand will stand with them just like Ron, but if war breaks out, will he send troops to support israel? what if Israel is on the verge of getting invaded will he then support sending troops?
I don't think so, again, I'm basing this on his voting record.
also this clause is very important:
(8) urges that, if the Government of Israel is compelled to take military action in legitimate self-defense against Iran's nuclear weapons program, the United States Government should stand with Israel and provide, in accordance with United States law and the constitutional responsibility of Congress to authorize the use of military force, diplomatic, military, and economic support to the Government of Israel in its defense of its territory, people, and existence.
Last edited:
If this resolution simply said that Israel has the right to use military action against Iran if they feel it's in their national security interests, I wouldn't have any problem with it. The problem with the resolution (other than the support for sanctions) is that it promises military aid to Israel in the event that they strike Iran's nuclear facilities. It's not simply a resolution that says, "Israel is a sovereign nation and can do what they feel is in their best national security interests." I would have no problem with a resolution like that.
Warlord
Member
- Joined
- May 2, 2013
- Messages
- 11,694
Wow you're really making so much of this aren't you?
This vote was not by any measure "horendous" it's a non-binding resolution for gods sake. They pass these every week and have done for years. I told you yesterday exactly how it would go. GET OVER IT.
As written in the resolution (not what you think will or will not happen), is that support of military aid dependent on Congress voting to authorize force?
You know what's freaking pathetic? People who have no perspective on the history or current makeup of the GOP whatsoever trying to label somebody a neocon who is making all the right moves in bringing more people into our movement. To say that Rand Paul is voting like a neocon shows such a severe lack of knowledge of what a neocon actually is and what the neocons actually support. Do you know the history of the neocons? Google Irving Kristol. Bush, McCain, Lindsey Graham, those are neocons. Ted Cruz is not a neocon, Rand Paul is not a neocon, even non liberty people like Michele Bachmann are not neocons. Rand had the language changed specifically so it was NOT a neoconservative piece of legislation. In return for that, he gave his vote. When you come on here and stir shit up when Rand isn't a Murray Rothbard clone you could at least not call him things which he is clearly not.
