Think Progress: Rand Paul is No Libertarian

[AuH20]

Some points are valid, while others are not. The real point is that Think Progress cares nothing about libertarianism.

http://thinkprogress.org/election/2015/04/06/3643093/rand-paul-not-libertarian/

 

[heavenlyboy34]

His father, Ron Paul is a “libertarian cult figure” who had tremendous appeal to young Republicans. Rand Paul is clearly marketing himself as the heir apparent to those supporters — the one candidate with a chance of expanding the Republican base.

They just couldn't resist.

 

[jeffro97]

They're just trying to turn off the more purist libertarians. "Rand Paul isn't a libertarian!" we already know this.

I typed up a small respons to it, because I felt like this was just some low hanging fruit waiting to be picked.

 

[William Tell]

[h=2]Think Progress:[/h]

LOL!

 

[fisharmor]

Agree, the article is poorly written, but these points need to be attended to.

Rand Paul Supports A Massive Increase In Defense SpendingNot so long ago, Rand Paul broke from Republican orthodoxy on defense spending and supported substantial cuts. A budget he introduced in 2011 called for a $164 billion cut in defense spending by 2016. But last month Paul abruptly reversed positions and proposed “a nearly $190 billion infusion to the defense budget over the next two years—a roughly 16 percent increase.” TIME called Paul’s switch a “stunning reversal.”

Anyone care to comment?

Rand Paul Supports Extensive Use Of Drones At Home And Abroad
In 2013, Rand Paul staged a 13-hour filibuster against CIA Director nominee John Brennan, demanding answers on the use of drones by the United States government. But Paul’s filibuster, which drew plaudits from civil libertarians, was much less than met the eye.
Paul was only protesting the use of drones in the very limited scenario of “a targeted killing ordered against a U.S. citizen on American soil” — something that has never happened. Paul introduced legislation that would prevent the use of a drone against a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil without a warrant, which the Pentagon says would be prohibited by existing law. But Paul supports the use of drones to conduct targeted killings overseas. He also supports the use of drones on U.S. soil as part of a border security effort.

I read all 13 hours of his filibuster after the fact, and the only thing this write-up fails to mention is that the filibuster was specifically about Brennan's unwillingness to answer the question.
He explicitly stated several times in the filibuster that he's ok with them being used. It's the drone equivalent of people who say "You know, we need cops because they provide a valuable service to society, but I'm not ok with them choking black guys to death on the sidewalk", who also fail to realize that this is the same "valuable service" that they've always provided.
The ring is evil, Frodo: it cannot be used for good. There is no current use of drones which is producing positive results.

Rand Paul Opposes The Legalization Of Marijuana
Rand Paul’s position on drugs like marijuana is “not to legalize them.” He stresses that smoking marijuana is “a bad thing to do.” Paul’s view is that instead of legalization, penalties for drug use and possession should be reduced.
Reason, a libertarian magazine, is not impressed: “He wants to keep everything illegal, but institute gentler penalties. That’s not remotely libertarian.”
Paul did recently support a bill that would assure states that legalize medical marijuana that patients would not be federally prosecuted.
Rand Paul Suggested Putting People In Prison For Listening To ‘Radical Political Speeches’
In a 2011 interview with Sean Hannity, Paul said he opposed some kinds of racial profiling but supported the profiling, deportation, and even imprisonment of people the government determined were listening to “radical political speeches.”

Also looking for a defense of this.....

 

[eleganz]

Think Progress, Salon, HuffPo, MotherJones...

I don't know why any of us has any reason to click on their junk links, its all trash meant to divide us and I think it actually works on some feeble minded libertarians.