View Full Version : Has Rand Paul Taken Over the GOP?
Taxcutter
06-21-2013, 09:33 AM
Maybe. At least its soul. No doubt its future.
Even left-wing politico.com notices.
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/the-rand-paul-moment-93085.html
Rand Paul exemplifies the core agenda of the Tea Party. Less spending, less taxation, less government.
Now that OBL has been whacked, Paul’s noninterventionist stance looks workable (as long as he keeps the DoD powder dry).
Rand Paul so far has studiously avoided the social issues, as Mitch Daniels advised the whole party some time back. I suspect Rand Paul would benefit by advocating that abortion, drugs, and gay marriage be eliminated from the national discussion and sent to the states. It is unworkable expecting san Francisco and Tuscaloosa to have the same thoughts on gay marriage. For either one to force its values on the other simply can’t work. This was the genius of the Framers.
Rand Paul has benefitted from the efforts of his father. A Libertarian position has been staked out but the son has not espoused the attention-grabbing but unworkable positions of the father.
It’s a long way to November 2016, but Rand Paul looks like the early GOP front-runner.
TheInternet
06-21-2013, 09:42 AM
We can only hope he has. Well, him and Cruz.
Chris
06-21-2013, 09:46 AM
I agree with much of what he says and would probably vote for him but think he's too young and inexperienced and we haven't seen yet how Washington might corrupt him.
nic34
06-21-2013, 11:39 AM
It’s a long way to November 2016, but Rand Paul looks like the early GOP front-runner.
Gosh, I hope so. :wink:
nic34
06-21-2013, 11:42 AM
I agree with much of what he says and would probably vote for him but think he's too young and inexperienced and we haven't seen yet how Washington might corrupt him.
I think you would have been happier in feudalist Europe.......
Chris
06-21-2013, 11:43 AM
I think you would have been happier in feudalist Europe.......
I prefer the free market that replaced feudalistic mercantilism to your socialism leading us back down the road to serfdom.
nic34
06-21-2013, 02:16 PM
You should know by now the "market" is never free, it's BOUGHT.
jillian
06-21-2013, 02:18 PM
We can only hope he has. Well, him and Cruz.
interesting...
because we all want to live in a dickensian nightmare, right?
Chris
06-21-2013, 02:19 PM
You should know by now the "market" is never free, it's BOUGHT.
Nic, the market is not bought, government is bought. In the market we buy goods and services, we get something for our money that we value.
Chris
06-21-2013, 02:21 PM
interesting...
because we all want to live in a dickensian nightmare, right?
What's the connection between Paul/Cruz and "a dickensian nightmare"?
nic34
06-21-2013, 02:42 PM
Nic, the market is not bought, government is bought. In the market we buy goods and services, we get something for our money that we value.
The ‘freedom’ of a market is, like beauty, in the eyes of the beholder. If you believe that the right of children not to have to work is more important than the right of factory owners to be able to hire whoever they find most profitable, you will not see a ban on child labor as an infringement on the freedom of the labor market.
If you believe the opposite, you will see an ‘unfree’ market, shackled by a misguided government regulation.
Chris
06-21-2013, 02:53 PM
The ‘freedom’ of a market is, like beauty, in the eyes of the beholder. If you believe that the right of children not to have to work is more important than the right of factory owners to be able to hire whoever they find most profitable, you will not see a ban on child labor as an infringement on the freedom of the labor market.
If you believe the opposite, you will see an ‘unfree’ market, shackled by a misguided government regulation.
The ‘freedom’ of a market is, like beauty, in the eyes of the beholder.
Agree. The free market is becoming more and more regulated by central planners who imagine they can manage it but cannot.
If you believe that the right of children not to have to work...
One, no such right exists. Two, it was free-market capitalism freed them up to attend government indoctrination centers we call schools. Government regulation for that came after the fact.
So much for the premises to the rest of that argument.
If you believe the opposite, you will see an ‘unfree’ market, shackled by a misguided government regulation.
I don't see things the way you a liberal do, as oppressor and oppressed--the way socialists do. As a libertarian, I see things in terms of liberty vs tyranny, a tyranny we keep edging toward worse than fascism.
"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is a government big enough to take away everything that you have."
~Gerald Ford
Mainecoons
06-21-2013, 03:03 PM
One thing is certain, government will always end up being oppressor if we let it by following progressive and statist ideas.
Peter1469
06-21-2013, 03:22 PM
I would rather see Rand Paul get some more experience to include executive experience as a governor. Senate only experience tends to set a president up for failure.
Chris
06-21-2013, 03:30 PM
TNA: Last question, senator. Would you like to announce right now that you will seek the Republican Party’s nomination for president in 2016?
Senator Paul: Not right now. I will continue considering it, but I will not make a decision until sometime in 2014.
@ Exclusive Interview With Sen. Rand Paul (http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/15728-exclusive-interview-with-sen-rand-paul)
He mentions Coolidge:
Senator Rand Paul: For about 100 years now, power has been moving toward the executive branch. That trend is mostly bad, but a different kind of president could use executive orders to undo some of the bad that’s been done.
TNA: That sounds like a very active executive.
Senator Paul: A more active executive, staying within constitutional bounds, could push back against Congress and work to save money and restore fiscal restraints. Calvin Coolidge, for example, was known to look at every line item in a budget bill before he decided whether to sign or veto it. That’s a good example of an active executive and a good pattern for a president to follow.
Chris
06-21-2013, 03:41 PM
I would rather see Rand Paul get some more experience to include executive experience as a governor. Senate only experience tends to set a president up for failure.
A governorship might be just the thing he needs to gain experience.
nic34
06-21-2013, 04:00 PM
One, no such right exists. Two, it was free-market capitalism freed them up to attend government indoctrination centers we call schools. Government regulation for that came after the fact.
So much for the premises to the rest of that argument.
Only because you deconstruct words to suit your argument. Do you believe children have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness or not?
I don't see things the way you a liberal do, as oppressor and oppressed--the way socialists do. As a libertarian, I see things in terms of liberty vs tyranny, a tyranny we keep edging toward worse than fascism.
Of course you don't see, you always distort simple concepts. Your idea of Liberty is opposing laws limiting the working days of coal miners to 10 hours, on the grounds that it ‘deprives them of the liberty of working as long as they wish....
"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is a government big enough to take away everything that you have."
~Gerald Ford
Now there's a libertarian thinker for you. If I had quoted him, he'd be just another "lib-ral".
Peter1469
06-21-2013, 04:09 PM
A governorship might be just the thing he needs to gain experience.
Yes. Clearly, the President is an executive position. Legislative positions require a totally different skill set. It is very important to understand the legislative process, but to be a good president you have to know how to be an executive.
Chris
06-21-2013, 04:18 PM
Only because you deconstruct words to suit your argument. Do you believe children have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness or not?
Of course you don't see, you always distort simple concepts. Your idea of Liberty is opposing laws limiting the working days of coal miners to 10 hours, on the grounds that it ‘deprives them of the liberty of working as long as they wish....
Now there's a libertarian thinker for you. If I had quoted him, he'd be just another "lib-ral".
Only because you deconstruct words to suit your argument.
What do you even mean by that?
Do you believe children have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness or not?
Yes, those are natural rights. You mentioned "the right of children not to have to work"--where'd you come up with that?
Of course you don't see, you always distort simple concepts.
What did I distort. I understand how you see things, I explained how I see things. Where's the distortion? It would do you well explain when you make accusations to give them some meaning.
Your idea of Liberty is opposing laws limiting the working days of coal miners to 10 hours, on the grounds that it ‘deprives them of the liberty of working as long as they wish....
Where did that come, speaking of deconstructions and distortions? I didn't say it.
Now there's a libertarian thinker for you. If I had quoted him, he'd be just another "lib-ral".
So you have nothing to say about what Ford said, just deconstructions and distortions.
Mainecoons
06-21-2013, 06:45 PM
Chris, I hate to break it to you but your deconstruction of Nic's prattle is so far above his limited capacity for critical thinking that it is going to go right over his head.
You need to learn how to communicate with him in short sentences and words that do not exceed 5 letters or so.
Very nice and thorough evisceration, though.
:rofl:
zelmo1234
06-21-2013, 07:13 PM
Only because you deconstruct words to suit your argument. Do you believe children have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness or not?
Of course you don't see, you always distort simple concepts. Your idea of Liberty is opposing laws limiting the working days of coal miners to 10 hours, on the grounds that it ‘deprives them of the liberty of working as long as they wish....
Now there's a libertarian thinker for you. If I had quoted him, he'd be just another "lib-ral".
Yes and now that we have given them the regulations that control wages, and hours and protect each and every aspect of thier lives. The companies that they once worked for left the country and moved to where they could make a profit!
Now they have the freedom to be unemployed, loosing thier wealth and having to take 2 and 3 jobs working 60 hours a week just to get by, instead of letting them work 60 hour in the coal mines and make 20 hours of overtime!
As far as the Child labor???? when I was a kid I worked mowing lawns, babysitting raking leaves, bailing hay, and my parents taught me how to manage money! I can't think of any of my friends that did not work!
And of course we did away with the sweatr shops, so that was just a straw man.
So point out how this socialist utopia that Obama and friends are helping the poor and middle class of htis nation? enquiring minds want to know
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.8 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.