Thursday, November 8, 2012

Warmonger Praise for Rand Paul (Rand wins some support)

Christopher Barcelo emails:
I don't know if you're listening to Peter Schiff Radio but when you have a chance I suggest you tune in when it's available for replay, or download.  Approx. 50 nor so mins in (as I write this) Scottie Nell Hughes states that the Tea Party could not get behind Ron Paul because though he is great, and she apparently 'could not agree more', on his domestic policy it is his foreign policy where they fall off.

Well we all know this.  But she goes further.

She then tries to justify the need for the warfare state by saying she's been to Iraq and Afganistan etc and 'THESE PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO KILL US FOLKS'.  

Yes, those people.  Those uncivilized terrorists out there want to bring down America.  Schiff baby glove responds to her in disagreement but misses the opportunity to really drive it home.

Best part, in the midst of this... not even, in the SAME BREATHE, she then starts to speak of how Rand Paul is the politician she's talking about for 2016 and says he's 'promising'.

Liberty is apparently only important domestically.

This shows the lack of fundamental principle in the Tea Party, Campaign for Liberty, and Rand Paul which starkly contrasts them from the very principle that attacks Ron Paul his followers and provides the basis for his message.

If I could say one thing to Ron Paul it would be that his son will single handedly tarnish this message and drive away followers, and to paraphrase Ron Paul, that's the key to the whole success of the liberty movement.

The best thing Ron Paul can do is distance himself from the real fringe, whom unfortunately seems to include his Son and the corrupted Tea Party.


21 comments:

  1. The war on terror is every bit as phony as the climate change carbon tax movement and war on drugs. If Rand will pretend one is legit(in order to show he is not wacky) he will pretend all the phony big governemnt memes are legit.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The only thing I think Rand is doing is playing politics, while Ron opened my eyes to the world, perhaps Rand is playing possum in hopes that he may actually change the country. If he is, he's very astute, otherwise I fear your conclusions are correct. I think Rand may be following the herd despite his early reputation for Ron's followers, in hopes of attaining Obama's "throne" in 4 years and really changing the country, if there's much of an America left at that point.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Exactly! Rand is playing politics to get the idiot establishment republicans to back him. His voting record is superb and this is how we infiltrate the White House. We have to "play the game" to take back the country. This is a genius tactic by Rand and I hope people understand what he is doing.

      Delete
  3. So sad to see Rand's true colors. I was a Rand apologist for a short time, but he's certainly shown he's no friend of liberty.

    His presence and behavior in Congress shame us and, more importantly for Rand, his father.

    I at least have the courage to call out my father when he starts talking about the new deal and what not. Ron needs to man up and call Rand on his nonsense. But it's not something a father can do to his son.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The tea party will ultimately go nowhere. Movements that grow have a characteristic in common: they are "for" something. The tea party is "for" nothing. Their talking parts are all in the "against" column. That's a difficult way to grow something.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's possible, though certainly it has been stronger and longer-lasting than, say, OWS.
      These things morph, keep that in mind. TEA grew out of the anti-Repub PorkBusters movement. There may be something that grows out of TEA. For now, they seem resolutely focused on NOT going past "live and let live". TEA has worked hard to NOT become a social-conservative movement. They do not speak to gay marriage or abortion ... Personally, I consider that a positive.
      Reduce government, preserve liberty and let the People decide on social issues. That's a pretty big tent.

      Delete
  5. I think it's wise to reserve judgement of Rand Paul. Waiting to judge him causes no harm. However, attacking him and causing harm to his reputation and political leverage prematurely could, in fact, harm the liberty movement. Just food for thought. The liberty movement sometimes is too quick to condemn people who are not offering the exact solution they deem fit. Furthermore, the liberty movement tends to show their hand and lacks patience. I think the people of the liberty movement would be wise to take a more strategic approach if they are serious about achieving any change through the political process / system. If they do not, they may as well abandon this method altogether and work on change from without.

    ReplyDelete
  6. "she's been to Iraq and Afganistan etc and 'THESE PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO KILL US FOLKS'."

    She's probably correct. It is natural to blame western leaders and other stuff over which we have some control...and there are all kinds of cross-currents in Islam... and how you want to behave in response might vary...but on purely factual grounds she's right.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The problem is the context in which she uses these people. Obviously there are some extremist Islamist who want to kill us. There are also Christians who bomb abortion clinics. Should this then justify the occupation of the Vatican?

      I think not. The solution is to act in defense yes, which is why Ron Paul supported going into Afghanistan to eliminate Bin Laden. But when you start parading as police to the world of course you're going to run into gangs, and incite both their actions and their growth.

      Delete
    2. While it is true that Islam allows for a terroristic interpretation and extremists will probably always exist; it is also true that nobody is denying America the right to fight actual terrorists that can be proven to be plotting against the U.S.

      However, what we have been seeing, and continue to see, is America sticking its big fat nose in THEIR business for decades, overthrowing their leaders, putting in puppet regimes who oppress them, declaring wars on them without them having attacked the U.S., telling them whether they have the right to nuclear weapons, killing thousands of innocents as "collateral damage", occupying their countries and bringing foreign 'values' over there to impose on them, and then expecting a thank you and wondering why "THESE PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO KILL US FOLKS!"

      Delete
  7. Peter Schiff isn't very anti-war himself:

    http://www.dailypaul.com/119119/peter-schiff-says-he-might-support-attacking-iran

    http://www.examiner.com/article/peter-schiff-unravels-on-alex-jones-show-advocating-preemptive-strike-on-nuclear-iran

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hence his baby gloving. I don't expect much from him, but I do expect much from those who take my contributions on the basis of principle and then 180.

      Delete
  8. Well, I still have hope that Rand will see the light and follow in the footsteps of his father, instead of these clowns in the so-called Tea Party. He should reflect on the election results. Romney went down in flames. The religious right is growing more and more unpopular with the electorate. People are really tired of these endless wars and all their tax dollars flushed down the toilet in the name of "American Exceptionalism" or some other hake-baked rationale cooked up by the political elites.

    ReplyDelete
  9. http://dougwead.wordpress.com/

    "In some respects, we are the weak link. We in the Liberty Movement will have to decide whether we are willing to become more than theorists but also successful, winning, political activists. Some of the debates will get scary as our candidate may decide that we need to cut our military bases from 900 to 75, instead of zero. He will be backing us away from the abyss, on his own timetable and it may be too rapid for the general public and not enough for some of us."

    Rand Paul - the death of the Ron Paul movement

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So, he admits that anything "too rapid for the general public" will be doomed to fail.

      Hence, for people in the liberty movement to vote is futile, as the only way "our candidate" is gonna make an impact, is by placating the general public, meaning he will not be making an impact for OUR SIDE at all.

      Delete
    2. But if we're third party we don't need the whole general public. All we need is around a third of them. The rest of the other two thirds can hate us, who cares? Half the country hates Obama and he's still the president.

      Delete
  10. "This shows the lack of fundamental principle in the Tea Party, Campaign for Liberty, and Rand Paul which starkly contrasts them from the very principle that attacks Ron Paul his followers and provides the basis for his message."

    should read

    the very principle that ATTRACTS to Ron Paul his followers etc. etc.

    Also I am aware that Rand himself did not make the above statements but if this is how you're being seen you're not putting out a good example. Ron Paul had such a base because they knew what he stood for. When you are shady, even if it's to fool the politicians around you, you can never fully gain the trust of supporters.

    When you break with basic principle even just to advance a cause, you have discredited your cause and tarnished it. Ron Paul is precisely right this is a battle of ideas. If we start depending on government to change government what is the difference between us and our supposed opposition... government.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. All this kind of talk is in my opinion utopian. We are TRAPPED within the government system & almost everyone supports it. We have to work within it to secure as much liberty for ourselves. If you're waiting for the day when every single mother on welfare, every war hawk, every socialist, etc. all of a sudden become anarcho-capitalists I think you'll be waiting a long long time.

      Delete
  11. My C4L group is NOT pro-war.

    ReplyDelete
  12. of course, on this site, if you backed the American Revolution, you are a warmonger.

    ReplyDelete