Rand Paul Announcing Run For The Presidential Nomination

[mrjarrell]

I'm not sure that he's really thought that through.

I think he's talking about stop and frisk. It may be an effective law enforcement technique, but so is unwarranted searches.

He's thought it through quite well. He, along with Corey Booker has been working on criminal justice reform for the last year or so, (sad that INGOers didn't know that or that we had a problem, even). It's been a pet project of his and one that has garnered him positive attention from even people on the left. Unlike the run of the mill republican, Paul sees that our system is weighted against minorities and youth. He's just not going to pander to the dinosaur tough on crime crowd that has managed to screw our system up. He's more interested in repairing it and fixing one of America's more shameful problems.

Rand Paul Has Potential To Push The GOP On Criminal Justice | ThinkProgress

Rand Paul wants to give ex-felons the vote. They sure won?t vote Republican.

Rand Paul?s criminal justice challenge ? and how he might deal with it - The Washington Post

 

[Dead Duck]

Again, what does this "Paul" guy think about going to war when needed.

 

[pudly]

Despite your swipe at "INGOers", I'm indeed aware of his thoughts on criminal justice reform. Those reforms are primarily aimed at non-violent offenders. The problem is that he just gave a prepared speech that I'm sure he and his assistants put a lot of time into that said that laws criminalizing violent offenses could be repealed.

I'd really like for someone in the media to ask if that is what he meant.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

He just tweeted this

Thankfully, our national media doesn't get to pick and choose our Republican Party's presidential nominees. Patriots like YOU do!

Eh... half right.

Ah well, if you want Rand, here's where you can donate

https://secure.randpaul.com/?sr=407tw1

 

[MisterChester]

He just tweeted this



Eh... half right.

Ah well, if you want Rand, here's where you can donate

https://secure.randpaul.com/?sr=407tw1

Ha, tell that to the people at the last GOP convention that were ignored for supporting Ron.

 

[MisterChester]

yeah, whatever.

I don't know what Paul meant by that. He can't mean that government people can establish religion as a part of government--there can't be a department of tithes and offerings--because that is clearly unconstitutional. It may be that he's talking about people in government expressing themselves.

This is how I think of it. It doesn't bother me if Congress has prayer before it meets. I don't care if there's a prayer breakfast or not. I don't care if a Christian president puts a nativity scene on the north lawn. I don't care if a Jewish defense secretary wears a beanie. I don't care if a Hindu IRS tax auditor has a Ganesh statue on her desk. I don't mind if the Christian Secretary of State has a picture of Jesus on his wall. I don't mind if religious people act like they are religious while on the job as long as it doesn't interfere with their work, and they don't harass other people with it, and they don't proselytize, and they don't put it in my face.

The problem is, we care too much about that. If we cared less, we would all have more freedom to be who we are. If we had thicker skins, and weren't so damned touchy, we all could do much more of what we want. But no, all people get all ape**** over religion and who's wearing what, and ****ing Charlie Brown Christmas! OMG! Fire that ***** who dares show that in public school! WTF? It's Charlie ****ing BROWN people? Who cares?

People, religious and not, scream bloody hell if someone else's chunk of belief is represented by actual people actually doing stuff. Ohh, we must stamp out religion! It's ruining our Utopia! But it's not just athiests or agnostics, it's everyone. All religions and no religions want to boohoo over other people's beliefs.

Just stop giving a **** that someone else is actively believing something you don't. Okay?






Sorry for the rant. I'm okay now.

I don't care if politicians are religious. What I do care about is organized religion's influence on our government.

 

[Dead Duck]

I don't care if politicians are religious. What I do care about is organized religion's influence on our government.

Ya -
Cause that would be just awful!

 

[KG1]

He just tweeted this

Thankfully, our national media doesn't get to pick and choose our Republican Party's presidential nominees. Patriots like YOU do!

Eh... half right.

Ah well, if you want Rand, here's where you can donate

https://secure.randpaul.com/?sr=407tw1

Ever heard of "Maverick" McCain?

 

[mrjarrell]

Ya -
Cause that would be just awful!

Yes, it could be. Especially when you have someone that wants to fulfill some kind of prophecy and has been described by their preacher father as a "biblical king" who's meant to bring about that prophecy. And, no. I'm not talking about Paul.

[video=youtube_share;Tj9M34DzAKo]http://youtu.be/Tj9M34DzAKo[/video]

 

[Cerberus]

Again, what does this "Paul" guy think about going to war when needed.

I suppose it depends on how you might define "when needed". I am pretty sure that if you did just a little research you would have your answer. Or you could just go by most of the status quo radio, print and TV pundits opinions.

 

[mrjarrell]

I suppose it depends on how you might define "when needed". I am pretty sure that if you did just a little research you would have your answer. Or you could just go by most of the status quo radio, print and TV pundits opinions.

It's amazing what a simple Google search turns up as the first link. Some folks just won't even try.
Rand Paul on the Issues

Rand Paul on War & Peace

Click here for 12 full quotes on War & Peace OR background on War & Peace. GOP is too eager for war; and so is Hillary. (Aug 2014) How many Americans should die to defend Iraq? (Jul 2014) ISIS are nasty terrorists but no clear-cut American interest. (Jun 2014) Iraq War gave Iran regional hegemony & caused Mideast chaos. (Jun 2014) Keep all options on the table, but don't declare war on Iran. (Apr 2014) Executive Branch can initiating war is a usurpation of power. (Mar 2014) No involvement in Syria, even if gas attack proven. (Sep 2013) No US interests in either side of Syrian war. (Sep 2013) No US weapons to kill Christians in Syria. (Aug 2013) It is unacceptable not to hate war. (Sep 2012) Opposed to Iraq War; no direct threat & no declared war. (Feb 2011) Would have voted against a declaration of war against Iraq. (Feb 2010)

 

[pudly]

I'll buy all of Rands positions on that list but one, maybe two:

Iraq War gave Iran regional hegemony & caused Mideast chaos.

Sorry Rand- Abandoning a weak Iraq gave Iran regional hegemony. Destroying and not replacing Libya's government turned that country into chaos. Reversing which countries America supports created chaos.

ISIS are nasty terrorists but no clear-cut American interest.

As a doctor, he should be aware of the value of treating an infestation before it gets too advanced. You can support others in the area and reduce the need for direct involvement.

 

[Cerberus]

I'll buy all of Rands positions on that list but one:

Iraq War gave Iran regional hegemony & caused Mideast chaos.

Sorry Rand- Abandoning a weak Iraq gave Iran regional hegemony. Destroying and not replacing Libya's government turned that country into chaos. Reversing which governments America supported created chaos.

Sorry Pudly, but Iran was indeed inserting it's influence during our little fiasco in Iraq. Following 9/11 we vowed to fight state sponsors of terror, then gave Iran and Syria a pass to go topple a contained mad man. No doubt that Saddam deserved a far more violent end than he got, but Iran and Syria both deserve to be completely destroyed. But alas that would remove the boogieman from under the bed, and without that boogieman what would the status quo politicos use to scare the masses?

The war on terror is one that we have not set out to win, and until someone with moral clarity enough to allow the military do what we have a military to do, is in charge, then we do not need to send those men and women to die in vain.

 

[EvilElmo]

I'll buy all of Rands positions on that list but one, maybe two:

Iraq War gave Iran regional hegemony & caused Mideast chaos.

Sorry Rand- Abandoning a weak Iraq gave Iran regional hegemony. Destroying and not replacing Libya's government turned that country into chaos. Reversing which countries America supports created chaos.

I think the point he's making is that our invasion of Iraq in the first place is what led to Iranian hegemony. Without Saddam there to keep their attention Iran is basically free to flex its might elsewhere in the middle east, as we're seeing more and more of. Saddam was a world-class murderous jack***, but he was also a good buffer against Iran (which is why the US supported him in the 80s).

 

[mrjarrell]

Well, the republican hit machine didn't take long to come out against him. Guessing the Military/Industrial Complex will have it out for him. He doesn't believe in endless warfare.

Rand Paul, Foreign Policy, and The Republican Delusion - Hit & Run : Reason.com

 

[Twangbanger]

Frankly, the GOP machine would be better off with Hillary in charge. They'll still get bigger defense budgets than Paul would favor, plus they'll still have the Clinton name to rail against. They know this, and they know she'll win...they're just jockeying for who will finish 2nd and control the biggest portion of the GOP donor list.

Consolidation of the master donor list is the only prize for Republicans in this election. They want your daddy's Republican to have that list, nobody else. If somebody who wasn't a warhawk made enough of a run to collar control of that list, the GOP machine would truly be cooked. The truth of the matter is, Hillary's going to save their butts; they just can't admit it.

 

[Leadeye]

Wish him the best of luck, but the RNC has already chosen JB, all other candidates need not apply.

 

[ATM]

I don't care if politicians are religious. What I do care about is organized religion's influence on our government.

That is a flaw with the state, many groups will seek to influence and steer such a monopoly of force, to advance their own goals via means prohibited to general society.

You can't really blame any one group for attempting to wield the power of the state as a personal weapon, it's how our system operates.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

The Rand Paul test: Clues to future of GOP | New York Post

 

[level.eleven]

I'd like to hear more from his father.

You can leave this country anytime you want.

Go for it. Find a better place to live.

Somalia is beautiful this time of year.