What Rand Paul really believes

[NYcarbineer]

I would say Rand Paul is more of a social conservative than a libertarian.

He does have some pretty fucked up ideas.

He's a Christian fundamentalist corporatist libertarian isolationist.

That's what curled his hair. lololol

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I would say Rand Paul is more of a social conservative than a libertarian.

He does have some pretty fucked up ideas.

He's a Christian fundamentalist corporatist libertarian isolationist.

That's what curled his hair. lololol

A corporatist-libertarian is an oxymoron.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I hope he loses to the liberal guy and I know nothing about his opponent.

Jack Conway 2010 .com | The truth about Jack Conway and his Senate campaign in Kentucky

This link is a farce and a scam. Basically, it is a big lie. No one claims responsibility for it and posting it is as deceitful as the lies it presents. I hope that a Moderator will look at this!

You have no problem with the OP linking to a post claiming to espouse Paul's views without interviewing him, and then you complain about one pointing out his opponents record and call it deceitful?

It is a campaign website, of course it is deceitful, but no where near as decietful as that article claiming to know where Rand Paul stands.

 

[Ravi]

I would say Rand Paul is more of a social conservative than a libertarian.

He does have some pretty fucked up ideas.

He's a Christian fundamentalist corporatist libertarian isolationist.

That's what curled his hair. lololol

A corporatist-libertarian is an oxymoron.

No it isn't. I have yet to see a libertarian speak up against corporations.

 

[GHook93]

No comments from the wingnuts and tea baggers????

I hope he loses to the liberal guy and I know nothing about his opponent.

Jack Conway 2010 .com | The truth about Jack Conway and his Senate campaign in Kentucky

Come on that website can't be truthful in the least, but if even half of its true, then I retract my statement!

 

[GHook93]

Jack Conway for United States Senate

So I guess just lying about issues is not enough. Now, web sites with lies are being built and passed as legitamite. Well, if that is the way you want to play the game...

After reading his website he seems like a liberal hack. Cut the deficit and create jobs, but his policies sound like spend, spend, spend which equates to tax tax tax. I have no doubt he supports illegal immigration and big government.

Heck I want the constitution party candidate to win!

 

[Zander]

But, but but...he is still leading in every poll.
Election 2010: Kentucky Senate - Rasmussen Reports

Even the kooks at dailykooks have him leading by 6 points. Find another strawman......

http://m.dailykos.com/stories/2010/5/31/871596/-.html

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

He's a Christian fundamentalist corporatist libertarian isolationist.

That's what curled his hair. lololol

A corporatist-libertarian is an oxymoron.

No it isn't. I have yet to see a libertarian speak up against corporations.

A corporatist is a person who believes that government should help out private businesses. That would be absolutely opposed by a libertarian.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I hope he loses to the liberal guy and I know nothing about his opponent.

Jack Conway 2010 .com | The truth about Jack Conway and his Senate campaign in Kentucky

Come on that website can't be truthful in the least, but if even half of its true, then I retract my statement!

Those are his genuine positions, but yes the website was made by a Rand Paul supporter.

 

[Modbert]

Those are his genuine positions, but yes the website was made by a Rand Paul supporter.

I doubt you'd support a website by someone who opposed Rand Paul. Keep up the double standard.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Those are his genuine positions, but yes the website was made by a Rand Paul supporter.

I doubt you'd support a website by someone who opposed Rand Paul. Keep up the double standard.

No, I wouldn't "support" that website, but if it was accurate what could I say?

 

[Modbert]

No, I wouldn't "support" that website, but if it was accurate what could I say?

Considering it's Rand Paul? You'd probably try to put it into a more favorable light Kevin.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

No, I wouldn't "support" that website, but if it was accurate what could I say?

Considering it's Rand Paul? You'd probably try to put it into a more favorable light Kevin.

I'd certainly dispute the conclusions drawn by a website that framed Rand's actual positions negatively, and anyone who disputes the conclusions drawn on the Jack Conway website should feel free to do so. However, I wouldn't just come out with "That website is obviously nothing but lies and a moderator should look into this."

You have a habit of trying to simply paint me as a "Paul Fanboy," be it Ron or Rand now apparently. You honestly don't believe that I come to my conclusions based on my own principles, and believe that I simply listen for what either of the Dr. Paul's have to say on a subject before commenting?

 

[Modbert]

I'd certainly dispute the conclusions drawn by a website that framed Rand's actual positions negatively, and anyone who disputes the conclusions drawn on the Jack Conway website should feel free to do so. However, I wouldn't just come out with "That website is obviously nothing but lies and a moderator should look into this."

You have a habit of trying to simply paint me as a "Paul Fanboy," be it Ron or Rand now apparently. You honestly don't believe that I come to my conclusions based on my own principles, and believe that I simply listen for what either of the Dr. Paul's have to say on a subject before commenting?

You yourself have told me that you and Ron Paul rarely if ever disagree. So for me to label you as a "Paul fanboy" is only a label you've brought upon yourself there Kevin. After all, where do you and Ron Paul disagree Kevin?

You have no problem with coming right out and saying that the website is true, though I noticed not without bias as it is done by a Rand Paul supporter.

Rand Paul is a Republican though, a regular typical Republican. So as to why he has your support, is boggling to me. After all, if you're a Libertarian, I assume you'd want a actual Libertarian candidate to run. Instead of a candidate that milked all the Libertarians of their money, hard work in volunteering, etc only to turn his back on them.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I'd certainly dispute the conclusions drawn by a website that framed Rand's actual positions negatively, and anyone who disputes the conclusions drawn on the Jack Conway website should feel free to do so. However, I wouldn't just come out with "That website is obviously nothing but lies and a moderator should look into this."

You have a habit of trying to simply paint me as a "Paul Fanboy," be it Ron or Rand now apparently. You honestly don't believe that I come to my conclusions based on my own principles, and believe that I simply listen for what either of the Dr. Paul's have to say on a subject before commenting?

You yourself have told me that you and Ron Paul rarely if ever disagree. So for me to label you as a "Paul fanboy" is only a label you've brought upon yourself there Kevin. After all, where do you and Ron Paul disagree Kevin?

You have no problem with coming right out and saying that the website is true, though I noticed not without bias as it is done by a Rand Paul supporter.

Rand Paul is a Republican though, a regular typical Republican. So as to why he has your support, is boggling to me. After all, if you're a Libertarian, I assume you'd want a actual Libertarian candidate to run. Instead of a candidate that milked all the Libertarians of their money, hard work in volunteering, etc only to turn his back on them.

Yes, we rarely disagree, that doesn't mean I blindly follow everything he says as you seem to suggest. Where do he and I disagree? Well we've gone through his religious beliefs in the past, as I'm not religious he and I disagree there. As for actual politics, he and I differ on immigration. He believes in a strict immigration policy, whereas I believe anyone who wants to come here should be allowed to do so.

As for Rand Paul, he's not a typical Republican. He's in the same mold as his father, but he's playing politics. I'm not a member of the Libertarian Party, so I'm not concerned with whether a member of the LP runs or not.

 

[Modbert]

Yes, we rarely disagree, that doesn't mean I blindly follow everything he says as you seem to suggest. Where do he and I disagree? Well we've gone through his religious beliefs in the past, as I'm not religious he and I disagree there. As for actual politics, he and I differ on immigration. He believes in a strict immigration policy, whereas I believe anyone who wants to come here should be allowed to do so.

As for Rand Paul, he's not a typical Republican. He's in the same mold as his father, but he's playing politics. I'm not a member of the Libertarian Party, so I'm not concerned with whether a member of the LP runs or not.

His religious beliefs which he wants to make law should trouble you. So I'll give you that one. And you want to let anyone in this country?

Rand Paul is a typical Republican. He's Pro-Life, even wants a federal amendment to ban Abortion. He's Anti-Gay Marriage and probably wants a federal amendment to ban that too despite his so called claims to leave it up to the states. He's for the Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. He's for the War on Drugs. He believes in opposing the legalization of euthanasia. He wants underground fences and helicopter stations at the border. He wouldn't close Gitmo.

Sounds like a typical Republican to me. On what issues does he differ with Republicans on? Trying to close the Fed? One issue does not make someone not a Republican.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Yes, we rarely disagree, that doesn't mean I blindly follow everything he says as you seem to suggest. Where do he and I disagree? Well we've gone through his religious beliefs in the past, as I'm not religious he and I disagree there. As for actual politics, he and I differ on immigration. He believes in a strict immigration policy, whereas I believe anyone who wants to come here should be allowed to do so.

As for Rand Paul, he's not a typical Republican. He's in the same mold as his father, but he's playing politics. I'm not a member of the Libertarian Party, so I'm not concerned with whether a member of the LP runs or not.

His religious beliefs which he wants to make law should trouble you. So I'll give you that one. And you want to let anyone in this country?

Rand Paul is a typical Republican. He's Pro-Life, even wants a federal amendment to ban Abortion. He's Anti-Gay Marriage and probably wants a federal amendment to ban that too despite his so called claims to leave it up to the states. He's for the Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. He's for the War on Drugs. He believes in opposing the legalization of euthanasia. He wants underground fences and helicopter stations at the border. He wouldn't close Gitmo.

Sounds like a typical Republican to me. On what issues does he differ with Republicans on? Trying to close the Fed? One issue does not make someone not a Republican.

Well you're twisting things regarding Ron Paul and religion. If people want to come here to work or live why should I have a problem with that?

Like I said, Rand is playing politics.

 

[Modbert]

Well you're twisting things regarding Ron Paul and religion. If people want to come here to work or live why should I have a problem with that?

Like I said, Rand is playing politics.

I suppose you've dropped the argument that Rand is nothing but a typical Republican. Unless he's lying of course about his views, but then he's a liar too.

As for Ron Paul and religion, not twisting a thing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Ron_Paul#Pro-life_legislation

Paul introduced The Sanctity of Life Act of 2005, a bill that would have defined human life to begin at conception, and removed challenges to prohibitions on abortion from federal court jurisdiction.[200] In 2005, Paul introduced the We the People Act, which would have removed "any claim based upon the right of privacy, including any such claim related to any issue of ... reproduction" from the jurisdiction of federal courts. If made law, either of these acts would allow states to prohibit abortion.[135] In 2005, Paul voted against restricting interstate transport of minors to get abortions.[201]

He also introduced H.R. 4379 that would prohibit the Supreme Court from ruling on issues relating to abortion, birth control, the definition of marriage and homosexuality and would cause the court's precedents in these areas to no longer be binding.[202]

I think the last one on the 2nd thing I quoted is very important. He wants to allow states to ban birth control, and of course make Homosexuality a crime. There is a reason why some things are best left up to the Federal Government there Kevin. How would you feel if a state made being homosexual a crime, punishable by five years in one of those "lovely" little camps where they "convert" you back to being straight?

I can't find Paul's position on euthanasia, but he seems to be against it too.

Theology, Not Politics by Rep. Ron Paul

The Pope’s commitment to human dignity, grounded in the teachings of Christ, led him to become an eloquent and consistent advocate for an ethic of life, exemplified by his struggles against abortion, war, euthanasia, and the death penalty. Yet what institutions around the world sanction abortion, war, euthanasia, and the death penalty? Governments.

I'm not saying religion controls his positions on every issues. Just ones that are the biggest to conflict with Christianity.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Well you're twisting things regarding Ron Paul and religion. If people want to come here to work or live why should I have a problem with that?

Like I said, Rand is playing politics.

I suppose you've dropped the argument that Rand is nothing but a typical Republican. Unless he's lying of course about his views, but then he's a liar too.

As for Ron Paul and religion, not twisting a thing.

Political positions of Ron Paul - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Paul introduced The Sanctity of Life Act of 2005, a bill that would have defined human life to begin at conception, and removed challenges to prohibitions on abortion from federal court jurisdiction.[200] In 2005, Paul introduced the We the People Act, which would have removed "any claim based upon the right of privacy, including any such claim related to any issue of ... reproduction" from the jurisdiction of federal courts. If made law, either of these acts would allow states to prohibit abortion.[135] In 2005, Paul voted against restricting interstate transport of minors to get abortions.[201]

He also introduced H.R. 4379 that would prohibit the Supreme Court from ruling on issues relating to abortion, birth control, the definition of marriage and homosexuality and would cause the court's precedents in these areas to no longer be binding.[202]

I think the last one on the 2nd thing I quoted is very important. He wants to allow states to ban birth control, and of course make Homosexuality a crime. There is a reason why some things are best left up to the Federal Government there Kevin. How would you feel if a state made being homosexual a crime, punishable by five years in one of those "lovely" little camps where they "convert" you back to being straight?

I can't find Paul's position on euthanasia, but he seems to be against it too.

Theology, Not Politics by Rep. Ron Paul

The Pope’s commitment to human dignity, grounded in the teachings of Christ, led him to become an eloquent and consistent advocate for an ethic of life, exemplified by his struggles against abortion, war, euthanasia, and the death penalty. Yet what institutions around the world sanction abortion, war, euthanasia, and the death penalty? Governments.

I'm not saying religion controls his positions on every issues. Just ones that are the biggest to conflict with Christianity.

The examples you gave have nothing to do with his Christianity, but with the Constitution. The Constitution doesn't give the federal government the authority to regulate abortion one way or the other, be involved with birth control, define marriage, and do you honestly believe that Ron Paul believes that homosexuals should be rounded up for reeducation? You do realize he recently voted to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell?" While not the same issue, it does show that he obviously has nothing against homosexuals whatsoever.

As for euthanasia, I'm against it too. I'm against any form of suicide. But this was merely a comment made by Ron Paul stating his personal opposition to euthanasia, not him saying that there needs to be a law against it.

 

[Modbert]

The examples you gave have nothing to do with his Christianity, but with the Constitution. The Constitution doesn't give the federal government the authority to regulate abortion one way or the other, be involved with birth control, define marriage, and do you honestly believe that Ron Paul believes that homosexuals should be rounded up for reeducation? You do realize he recently voted to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell?" While not the same issue, it does show that he obviously has nothing against homosexuals whatsoever.

As for euthanasia, I'm against it too. I'm against any form of suicide. But this was merely a comment made by Ron Paul stating his personal opposition to euthanasia, not him saying that there needs to be a law against it.

I'm not saying whether he wants homosexuality to be a crime, I don't think he does. However, actions have consequences, and you/Ron Paul need to realize that. In a perfect world, the Federal Government wouldn't have to tell people in states that Homosexuality is not a crime. We do not live in a perfect world.

As for Mr. Paul, I'm merely saying his positions are influenced by his religion when it comes to issues such as these. Considering I've never found anything about Euthanasia when googling it, I'm going to assume he's never really talked about it outside of what I posted.