DCPolitics

Rand Paul Is Pandering … Already

One of the great things about former U.S. Rep. Ron Paul is that he calls things exactly like he sees them … which is invariably exactly how they are. For example, the elder Paul has been unapologetic in his opposition to America’s failed “War on Drugs,” just as he’s been…

One of the great things about former U.S. Rep. Ron Paul is that he calls things exactly like he sees them … which is invariably exactly how they are.

For example, the elder Paul has been unapologetic in his opposition to America’s failed “War on Drugs,” just as he’s been adamant that government shouldn’t sanction or oppose marriage (gay or straight). Are those views “kooky” and “out of the mainstream?” Not at all … both have gained widespread acceptance, in no small part because they are absolutely correct.

But what about Paul’s son, U.S. Sen. Rand Paul? Sadly he’s moving in the wrong direction on both issues …

Taking the advice of the Rick Santorum wing of the “Republican” party, “Paul the Younger” has decided to overtly pander to social conservatives in an effort to shore up his fledgling 2016 presidential aspirations. Specifically, Paul says government should continue criminalizing recreational drug use and telling churches who they can and can’t marry.

“I’m not advocating everyone go out and run around with no clothes on and smoke pot,” Paul told a group of social conservatives in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. “I’m not a libertarian. I’m a libertarian Republican. I’m a constitutional conservative.”

Huh? What does that mean, exactly? Because we’ve never heard a candidate call himself a “Republican” or a “conservative” before …

What about simply supporting freedom and free markets and letting the labels take care of themselves? Oh right … it’s no longer possible to get elected in America by standing firm on common sense principles, is it?

Or is it? After all, if the election of 2012 taught “Republicans” (or “libertarian Republicans”) anything, it should have been that pandering isn’t a pathway to victory.

Meanwhile, as Paul attempts to play the game of addition with the big government moralizers … he’s already experience subtraction from the ranks of freedom and free market defenders.

“I can’t help but wonder how Paul would be different from any other Republican president,” Mike Riggs at Reason.com notes.

We’re starting to wonder the same thing ourselves …

And therein lies the problem with trying to court the small-minded … you lose the open-minded.

In fact pandering like this is exactly what turns a principled movement into a soulless borg. Not to mention the sort of party that kicks people like Ron Paul to the curb. Seriously what’s next? Is Rand Paul going to come out for ethanol subsidies? Sugar subsidies (like his boy Marco Rubio)? Or corporate cronyism for Boeing?

Make no mistake: This is a very troubling sign for Rand Paul’s candidacy …

***

Related posts

DC

Hunter Biden Found Guilty On Gun Charges

FITSNews
DC

Biden Laptop Highlights Importance Of Independent Media

Dylan Nolan
Politics

Prioleau Alexander: A Congressman And A Lobbyist Walk Into A Bar

E Prioleau Alexander

49 comments

Daniel Encarnacion May 13, 2013 at 2:38 pm

I don’t disagree with what he said. I wouldn’t advocate doing those things either. That doesn’t mean I support the federal government making them illegal though. He is pointing out that libertarians who support the legalization of such things are not necessarily proponents of doing those things. There is a difference and that distinction needs to be made more often.

Reply
WeThePeopleSC May 13, 2013 at 2:38 pm

I don’t disagree with what he said. I wouldn’t advocate doing those things either. That doesn’t mean I support the federal government making them illegal though. He is pointing out that libertarians who support the legalization of such things are not necessarily proponents of doing those things. There is a difference and that distinction needs to be made more often.

Reply
GrandTango May 13, 2013 at 2:40 pm

Make no mistake: This is a very troubling sign for FITS’ credibility…
FITS: Romney and McCain BASHED just and moral social Conservatives, while Obama played to the most-vengeful, Hate-filled and most corrupt of his party (in other words the average democrat)…
You’re suggesting the GOP nominee sell-out the most decent for the sake of the Liberal-Tarians, which will result in another democrat…(despite all the Obama scandals and failure)…
He’s STUPID, if he listens to you. Your kinda candidate loses over and over…McCain and Romney are proof…

Reply
Daniel Encarnacion May 13, 2013 at 2:44 pm

Huh? McCain and Romney are libertarians? They were pro-war, pro-tax, pro-big spending moderates. They are certainly not libertarian. #facepalm

Reply
GrandTango May 13, 2013 at 3:05 pm

Liberal Tarians are Moderates….
FITS (Sanford) is a master at Triangulation. They are anti-defense, indecent and ignorant of the cost to government (us) of immorality…They attract followers because they can demonize decency and sell Utopia to the non-thinking…
Not to mention: Liberal-Tarians are just as apologetic for America as McCain and to some degree Romeny. They whine about job-producers not getting murdered by taxes, but they are Hunky-dory with affrimattive action, welfare, food stamps and voter fraud.

Reply
Daniel Moore May 16, 2013 at 10:14 am

Once again, know who and what a libertarian is..you just sound like a mad chicken hawk.

Reply
Kirby Whosoever Harris May 18, 2013 at 6:50 pm

Grand Tango has his factions mixed up. Libertarians are not for Romney or McCain, they are NOT moderates, if anything they are extreme right with right being hardly any government, they are as limited government as you can get. They are not anti-defense, they are anti-offense and anti policeman of the world.

Grand is ignorant of facts, because McCain was not apologetic for America at all. He was and is a war monger. We aren’t apologetic for America, we are against when the regimes that run America ignore America’s principles to force other nations to its will.

Reply
Kirby Whosoever Harris May 18, 2013 at 6:52 pm

Dude are you ignorant, McCain and Romney are polar opposite of a libertarian’s candidate. And Libertarians are as far right as you can go aka very very limited government..almost to the point of non-existence.

Reply
? May 19, 2013 at 10:58 am

Minarchism vs. Anarchism is the great debate in libertarian circles….if you ever want to whip up a frenzy/troll such people…just bring the topic up and step back and watch the fireworks.

Reply
Cicero May 13, 2013 at 2:48 pm

The hard right is never satisfied. Ron Paul accomplished exactly nothing in his thousand years in Congress, other than sell a lot of books and magazines that occasionally trafficked in crazy conspiracy theory and gold standardism. He could have done all that without getting a government paycheck, government healthcare, and without the stealth earmarks he sent back to his district in Texas. Now his son is talking like someone really conservative who might actually get elected, and might pull the country to (gasp!) the right! Better he return to the circle-jerk hard-right that values purity and oddness over success? Give me Reagan over Ron Paul any day.

Reply
GrandTango May 13, 2013 at 3:06 pm

The hard right has not had a presidntial candidate for the last 2 elections…
Why would we be satisfied, you ignorant @$$-hole???

Reply
Daniel Moore May 16, 2013 at 10:09 am

If you knew anything about Dr. Paul you would know that he didn’t take a government paycheck in all of his so called “thousand years of Congress”. Instead of funds going to insiders such as NEO-CON fanboy Paul Ryan(so his fathers small business could become a multimillion dollar government subsidy) these funds went to parks and harbors. But no, lets keep acting like we are small government and growing the government just like your GOD Reagan did.

Reply
Cicero May 17, 2013 at 10:27 am

That’s a joke. RP never refused his salary. He offered to take less, but in the end took the money. He’s pensioned now. ALSO, he missed 92% of congressional votes in 2012 while he was out playing presidential candidate, but took 100% of his salary. In other words, taxpayers subsidized his campaign. And YEAH, thanks for admitting that he took fed funds for “parks and harbors.” What business do the feds have funding such things, according to RP? Hypocrisy wrapped in self-righteousness, with a dash of crazy. That’s your boy.

Reply
? May 19, 2013 at 10:57 am

“YEAH, thanks for admitting that he took fed funds for “parks and harbors.” What business do the feds have funding such things, according to RP?”

Well…just so you understand his philosophy a little better, he put in for his districts’ slice of the “pie/stolen loot”, then voted against the earmarks on the basis that the redistribution(and initial theft) for such things shouldn’t be happening…but if they were going to happen(and they did 99% of the time) his constituents weren’t getting screwed(having money taken from them, but none returned) when it was going to happen anyway

So it’s a little more nuanced than you are understanding.

The whole political system is a screwed up mess, and RP did his best(and he’s not perfect) under what is basically an impossible situation.

I could also make an argument that if someone is trying to “fix” the system(which in my opinion is impossible) they should at least get paid. (How much, etc., is a separate discussion)

I think anyone suggesting RP is crooked or not ethical is simply not being genuine. The dude stood in front of GOP audiences saying things that got him routinely “booed”….so on that basis alone…I see no one else on either side of the aisle getting booed for such things as:

1. The Golden Rule (GOP booing)

2. Reducing military and welfare spending(a boo from each side respectively) in an attempt to balance budgets.

3. A return to free market healthcare(boo’s from the Dems)

You may disagree with him and I can understand why you call him crazy…however “hypocritical” among other things doesn’t seem to fit.

What I find remarkable is that Ron Paul has no chance of winning anything and no impact on current internal politics as he holds no office….yet his name still comes up over and over again.

Reply
Cicero May 13, 2013 at 2:48 pm

The hard right is never satisfied. Ron Paul accomplished exactly nothing in his thousand years in Congress, other than sell a lot of books and magazines that occasionally trafficked in crazy conspiracy theory and gold standardism. He could have done all that without getting a government paycheck, government healthcare, and without the stealth earmarks he sent back to his district in Texas. Now his son is talking like someone really conservative who might actually get elected, and might pull the country to (gasp!) the right! Better he return to the circle-jerk hard-right that values purity and oddness over success? Give me Reagan over Ron Paul any day.

Reply
Daniel Moore May 16, 2013 at 10:09 am

If you knew anything about Dr. Paul you would know that he didn’t take a government paycheck in all of his so called “thousand years of Congress”. Instead of funds going to insiders such as NEO-CON fanboy Paul Ryan(so his fathers small business could become a multimillion dollar government subsidy) these funds went to parks and harbors. But no, lets keep acting like we are small government and growing the government just like your GOD Reagan did.

Reply
Cicero May 17, 2013 at 10:27 am

That’s a joke. RP never refused his salary. He offered to take less, but in the end took the money. He’s pensioned now. ALSO, he missed 92% of congressional votes in 2012 while he was out playing presidential candidate, but took 100% of his salary. In other words, taxpayers subsidized his campaign. And YEAH, thanks for admitting that he took fed funds for “parks and harbors.” What business do the feds have funding such things, according to RP? Hypocrisy wrapped in self-righteousness, with a dash of crazy. That’s your boy.

Reply
? May 19, 2013 at 10:57 am

“YEAH, thanks for admitting that he took fed funds for “parks and harbors.” What business do the feds have funding such things, according to RP?”

Well…just so you understand his philosophy a little better, he put in for his districts’ slice of the “pie/stolen loot”, then voted against the earmarks on the basis that the redistribution(and initial theft) for such things shouldn’t be happening…but if they were going to happen(and they did 99% of the time) his constituents weren’t getting screwed(having money taken from them, but none returned) when it was going to happen anyway

So it’s a little more nuanced than you are understanding.

The whole political system is a screwed up mess, and RP did his best(and he’s not perfect) under what is basically an impossible situation.

I could also make an argument that if someone is trying to “fix” the system(which in my opinion is impossible) they should at least get paid. (How much, etc., is a separate discussion)

I think anyone suggesting RP is crooked or not ethical is simply not being genuine. The dude stood in front of GOP audiences saying things that got him routinely “booed”….so on that basis alone…I see no one else on either side of the aisle getting booed for such things as:

1. The Golden Rule (GOP booing)

2. Reducing military and welfare spending(a boo from each side respectively) in an attempt to balance budgets.

3. A return to free market healthcare(boo’s from the Dems)

You may disagree with him and I can understand why you call him crazy…however “hypocritical” among other things doesn’t seem to fit.

What I find remarkable is that Ron Paul has no chance of winning anything and no impact on current internal politics as he holds no office….yet his name still comes up over and over again.

Reply
MashPotato May 13, 2013 at 3:29 pm

It’s not easy to be considered a viable candidate for the presidency, and I’m very impressed with all the work Rand has done and is willing to do for it. I’m not worried about him pandering because we know where his conscience is. Sure, I wish he’d go full libertarian the way his dad does, but after losing two (three if you count ’88) elections like that, you have to do something different.

Reply
sailing May 15, 2013 at 11:27 am

His Dad’s support built more than 100% between the 2008 and 2012 elections. Before super Tuesday a Reuters, GOP only, national primary poll had him in second place with a huge surge to 22%. Even Rueters, the company that ran the poll only put that in paragraph four and no other media addressed it at all, instead running stories about how the ‘race was over’, and smears. Then no one polled for quite a time. Finally Ron’s polls were lower.

If Ron used his own organization Ron’s supporters built for Ron, for another cycle, I do believe he’d be unstoppable. And if he were younger, I don’t think anyone would be counting him out.

And even with the age depreciation, he’s the best in sight, imho.

I just don’t think he has any plan to run again.

Reply
MashPotato May 13, 2013 at 3:29 pm

It’s not easy to be considered a viable candidate for the presidency, and I’m very impressed with all the work Rand has done and is willing to do for it. I’m not worried about him pandering because we know where his conscience is. Sure, I wish he’d go full libertarian the way his dad does, but after losing two (three if you count ’88) elections like that, you have to do something different.

Reply
sailing May 15, 2013 at 11:27 am

His Dad’s support built more than 100% between the 2008 and 2012 elections. Before super Tuesday a Reuters, GOP only, national primary poll had him in second place with a huge surge to 22%. Even Rueters, the company that ran the poll only put that in paragraph four and no other media addressed it at all, instead running stories about how the ‘race was over’, and smears. Then no one polled for quite a time. Finally Ron’s polls were lower.

If Ron used his own organization Ron’s supporters built for Ron, for another cycle, I do believe he’d be unstoppable. And if he were younger, I don’t think anyone would be counting him out.

And even with the age depreciation, he’s the best in sight, imho.

I just don’t think he has any plan to run again.

Reply
Mario Leone May 13, 2013 at 6:09 pm

Shouldn’t churches be allowed to decide who they want to marry? And I’m against DOMA. I think they’re stepping up the attacks on the few liberty guys we have a bit too much.

Reply
Mario Leone May 13, 2013 at 6:09 pm

Shouldn’t churches be allowed to decide who they want to marry? And I’m against DOMA. I think they’re stepping up the attacks on the few liberty guys we have a bit too much.

Reply
Justin Alexander May 13, 2013 at 7:50 pm

I’ve only just done a quick google search, but I’m failing to find the pandering on marriage. Reference?

Reply
Justin Alexander May 13, 2013 at 7:50 pm

I’ve only just done a quick google search, but I’m failing to find the pandering on marriage. Reference?

Reply
? May 13, 2013 at 8:48 pm

Neocons want their pound of flesh…they will demand Rand put the knife in the back of his own father in the end.

It will be interesting to see if he does it. It will also be interesting to see how many libertarians Rand dupes into following him down the road to no where.

Reply
GrandTango May 14, 2013 at 8:07 am

Ron has put his knife in the back of America. I think Rand understands his dad, and his dad’s followers, are the Kook Fringe, UFO-chasing, nutjobs…

Reply
? May 14, 2013 at 9:30 am

So would you endorse Rand Paul for President?

Reply
Daniel Moore May 16, 2013 at 10:12 am

The greatest way to know you are ignorant is you dismissing something before you research it.

Reply
? May 13, 2013 at 8:48 pm

Neocons want their pound of flesh…they will demand Rand put the knife in the back of his own father in the end.

It will be interesting to see if he does it. It will also be interesting to see how many libertarians Rand dupes into following him down the road to no where.

Reply
9" May 13, 2013 at 9:48 pm

Do ya’ll remember when he was in ,The Sex Pistols and sang,’God Save The Queen’?

It’s like they were looking for trouble on their first US tour(and last):

Jan. 5: Great Southeast Music Hall, Atlanta, Ga.

Jan. 6: Taliesyn Ballroom, Memphis, Tenn.

Jan. 8: Randy’s Rodeo, San Antonio, Texas

Jan. 9: Kingfish Club, Baton Rouge, La.

Jan. 10: Longhorn Ballroom, Dallas, Texas

Jan. 12: Cain’s Ballroom, Tulsa, Okla.

Jan. 14: Winterland, San Francisco, Calif.

Reply
? May 13, 2013 at 10:29 pm

I was really disappointed that he didn’t dance on Thatcher’s grave when he had the chance.

Reply
9" May 14, 2013 at 12:34 am

yeah,well

a working-class hero is something to be

Reply
GrandTango May 14, 2013 at 8:06 am

Your Hatred of the Dead, and anything decent, is un-natural. You represent yourself as evil incarnate. A demon on earth.
Any good man is failing to let you pass, un-assaulted.
When the immoral and the corrupt are allowed unabated, it is on us, also, to smite you.

Reply
? May 14, 2013 at 9:29 am

Flipping through the Bible today?

It’s amazing that you attribute my power to that of an earthly demon. I feel honored.

So have you taken my recommendation of having your care taker up your meds, or are you enjoying the ride today?

In fairness to them, you probably cheek them anyway when they try. Most of the mentally ill don’t want to take their meds so I assume you aren’t any different.

Reply
9" May 14, 2013 at 7:08 pm

To quote Alice Cooper:’I Love The Dead’.But T? How can you stand the smell,when you’re ‘practicing’,necrophilia?

I guess the night-crawlers make for a funky lube,huh?

Reply
9" May 13, 2013 at 9:48 pm

Do ya’ll remember when he was in ,The Sex Pistols and sang,’God Save The Queen’?

It’s like they were looking for trouble on their first US tour(and last):

Jan. 5: Great Southeast Music Hall, Atlanta, Ga.

Jan. 6: Taliesyn Ballroom, Memphis, Tenn.

Jan. 8: Randy’s Rodeo, San Antonio, Texas

Jan. 9: Kingfish Club, Baton Rouge, La.

Jan. 10: Longhorn Ballroom, Dallas, Texas

Jan. 12: Cain’s Ballroom, Tulsa, Okla.

Jan. 14: Winterland, San Francisco, Calif.

Reply
? May 13, 2013 at 10:29 pm

I was really disappointed that he didn’t dance on Thatcher’s grave when he had the chance.

Reply
9" May 14, 2013 at 12:34 am

yeah,well

a working-class hero is something to be

Reply

Leave a Comment