Rand will say anything to get elected.

Oh, no politician has ever done that.

 

I don't know if I'll support Rand Paul or not but he has come off so far, as refreshingly candid. Doesn't seem to just be speaking in rehearsed "Sound Bites", as most politicians do.

 

Its not illegal to be racist. It's stupid and has no place in a civilized society -- but its not illegal. The Pauls ideology attracts people who want to be left alone. That ideology tends to be tolerant. With that you get the get the really good and the really ugly.

 

The Pauls have been the most outspoken people when it comes to our laws and how they disproportionately target minorities. From the drug war and its targeting on blacks and to actual war and its targeting on middle-easterners.

 

Illegal or not. It's definitely not Presidential. The things Habib said are one of the reasons I consider myself a libertarian and not a Libertarian.

Illegal or not. It's definitely not Presidential. The things Habib said are one of the reasons I consider myself a libertarian and not a Libertarian.

 

That his ideology attracts racists? How do you differ from the big L verse the little l?

 

You can go back in history and find every ideology known to man has enslaved or sought the enslavement or elimination of one race or the other -- some of the recent atrocities have been under those that have been called themselves progressives, socialists, or communists (Hitler, Stalin, Mao) Are they not just as guilty? Why do people who hold a pro-government view not looked down upon as racists? After all, you cannot enslave a population without having legal force over them. Legal force is obtained by having the government on your side.

 

And what isn't presidential? I'm curious to read your thoughts. Like I said, Hunter said these things nearly 2 decades ago. And as stupid as what he said, it's with his quotes taken out of context.

 

Shall we delve into previous presidents past? Snorting cocaine, starting political careers with weathermen members, infidelity, etc. To say presidential candidates are above the fray is not reality. They're human. They, and their aides, will make human mistakes.

 

The ideology of the Paul's unfortunately may attract those with racist thoughts (and historically, so do all the others). Oh well. We can't control that and its not like he's craving their support. I'm sure if you asked him, he wouldn't want it.

 

The main point of the Pauls ideology is that government cannot and should not infringe on an individuals rights through the force of government. No matter what a racist may want, supporting Paul will never enable them to dominate one race or another because in order to do that, you must gain legal force over another race. That would directly contradict everything they've fought for, voted for, and in the case of Ron Paul, spent almost their entire career fighting against.

 

Calling them a racist is a tool the left and the moderate R's have used, and in Rand's case, continue to use to discredit them. Rand is a threat to the left because they are, for the past decade, the side that's been good on civil liberties. Since Obama has taken office, they've abandoned that view. To the right, he's a threat because he doesn't believe we have to be foreign policy hawks. He scares the crap outta both sides.

 

This story isn't about Jack Hunter. It's about the push to label those who hold the belief and advocate for the most localized form of self-government -- the individual controlling themselves, state's rights, etc -- you're a racist. Whatever.

 

Are you not a fan of Rand?

Edited July 12, 201313 yr by marvel

Rand Paul brings bill to halt US aid to Egypt post-'coup' | Fox News

 

And here he is attempting anything and everything to get elected. Not being a good representative to the state of KY. Darn him. Why does he keep doing this type of stuff? Is he like, trying to actually change policy?

 

How about his about face on immigration?

So because he is a Republican who preaches limited government and is actually consistent with his rhetoric, actions and votes, which often interest people of different ideologies; that is equivalent with saying anything to get elected?

 

And Rand never rallied for southern secession, so it seems he does have a future. You'd know that if you actually attempted to do research rather than Google "JACK HUNTER SOUTHERNER SECESSION."

 

Please provide me examples where Rand says anything to get elected.

 

Never said Rand said those things, one of his advisors did though and if Rand had any sense he would get rid of him.

How about his about face on immigration?

 

Silly him for wanting border protection before more amnesty.

Silly him for wanting border protection before more amnesty.

 

No he use to be completely against amnesty and rant about how we shouldn't have any amnesty, now he supports it.

No he use to be completely against amnesty and rant about how we shouldn't have any amnesty, now he supports it.

 

One is allowed to evolve on issues. Ronald Reagan was a Democrat before becoming a Republican. Obama used to be against same sex marriage.

No he use to be completely against amnesty and rant about how we shouldn't have any amnesty, now he supports it.

 

You are doing nothing but showing your lack knowledge on the Senator and his views. He doesn't support amnesty. He supports an expansion of our pathetic work visa program to allow more immigrants. This does not make them citizens. If they want citizenship, they have to do it properly.

 

He won't vote for anything unless it FIRST secures the border and giving Congress back its authority to vote on whether or not the border is secure -- not an un-elected bureaucrat .

So he has backed away from those statements? I said stuff 20 years ago that I would be embarrassed about to. Even though I know most BGPers have never said a hurtful, racist, bigoted, chauvinistic or elitist remark in their lives that they now regret.

 

I'll continue to watch what this guy says going forward and determine what I think of him from his current actions.

 

How many years of non-association or non-contact is enough?

You are doing nothing but showing your lack knowledge on the Senator and his views. He doesn't support amnesty. He supports an expansion of our pathetic work visa program to allow more immigrants. This does not make them citizens. If they want citizenship, they have to do it properly.

 

But that's exactly what amnesty is. It's giving immunity to people who are here illegally and granting them visas in order to make their immigration status legal.

No problem on your end with Candidate Obama and Ayers?

 

Are we seriously stretching so far, we're making these comparisons?

How many years of non-association or non-contact is enough?

 

On certain things there will never be enough, actively trying to tear apart this country is one of those things.

But that's exactly what amnesty is. It's giving immunity to people who are here illegally and granting them visas in order to make their immigration status legal.

 

Amnesty would make them citizens. They would get citizen benefits -- voting, SS, medicaid, medicare, etc. Work Visa program would not allow them those benefits.

 

 

His expansion of the work visa program would make them taxpaying workers. They can't be in the same line as a visa worker and in line to be an immigrant.

 

 

Not the same. Benefits are entirely different.

 

But they do need immunity. We need them here and they shouldn't have to be always looking over their head.

Amnesty would make them citizens. They would get citizen benefits -- voting, SS, medicaid, medicare, etc. Work Visa program would not allow them those benefits.

 

 

His expansion of the work visa program would make them taxpaying workers. They can't be in the same line as a visa worker and in line to be an immigrant.

 

 

Not the same. Benefits are entirely different.

 

But they do need immunity. We need them here and they shouldn't have to be always looking over their head.

 

Rand Paul's Immigration Plan in his own words from the Washington Times

 

"After ensuring border security, I then would normalize the status of 11 million undocumented citizens so they can join the work force and pay taxes. Normalization would get them a temporary visa..."

 

He's taking a bunch of people currently guilty of breaking the law and giving them status such that they're then not breaking the law and being given no penalty for doing so. That's a dictionary definition of "amnesty". Anything else is about shifting definitions for politics.