Texas Rep. Ron Paul is known as being a staunch Republican-Libertarian hybrid that has incredible disdain towards the federal government. He has also produced a few sons, one of which has decided to run for the Senate in Kentucky.
Rand Paul is an ophthalmologist (eye doctor) and founder of Kentucky Taxpayers United, an anti-taxation organization. He has also spent considerable amounts of time crusading for his father, Ron, on his numerous Presidential campaigns.
Congressman Ron Paul had this to say regarding his sons campaign:
“I’ve always encouraged my children to participate in the public debate. Should Senator Bunning decide not to run, I think Rand would make a great US Senator.
I, like Rand, have been impressed with Senator Bunning’s opposition to the Bank Bailout. I think the Republican Party should be supportive of Senator Bunning and not try to push him out of office.
Should Senator Bunning decide to retire, I think it is important to have a conservative Republican and taxpayer advocate in the race.”
Rand Paul is anti-tax, anti-big government, anti-federal reserve and anti-government involvement in anything besides the military. I am sure he secretly believes that private interests should run our military as well. On his campaign website, which is barely up and running, (His blog politely asks for us to “Please come back later.” His about page simply states that “The requested URL /about/ was not found on this server.”) Rand Paul militantly announces a ‘money bomb.’
“Money bombs can be hard to predict, but we believe we can neutralize the competition with our army of small donors.” Even though this sounds like he has an army of supporters that plan on blowing up money, this is not the case.
Paul has geared up his base in an effort to raise one million by September 23rd, 2009. When you go to his main page you will notice a huge banner proclaiming that “The Fight Is On” and “$892,894.00 toward freedom!” These slogans seem to be typical of any campaign that you might witness across our great country. Whether one is campaigning for Soil and Water Conservation District Supervisor for District 3 in Hennepin County or for Mayor of Yucca Valley California, I would only expect them to march “toward freedom” and blow-up large amounts of money.
But, if we are marching towards freedom, where do we currently stand? Rand Paul surely is not taking the stance that the United States of America does not have freedom, is he?
Paul says that, “The Federal Government must return to its constitutionally enumerated powers and restore our inalienable rights.” That sounds like a worth while cause; something I can stand-up for! But, wait a second. What specifically is Paul talking about?
He could be mentioning the Patriot Act, one of the most disgusting and fascist acts that has ever been passed. We can thank Republican President George W. Bush for this one. Maybe he is talking about the “Nazi-esque” Obama power-grab called Health Care Reform.
Paul would fix health care once and for all, “As Senator, I would ensure that real free market principles are applied to fix this problem.” What the hell does that mean? I can only assume that he is against government involvement in health care too.
So, let me get all of this straight. Mr. Rand Paul is for our constitution, against government involvement in health care and he thinks that we currently are not free. If he is pro-US constitution he must agree with it 100%, right? We have all read it a million times, but here it is again.
“We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
That is so wonderful, I don’t know of any words that could be assembled in any other way that would be so perfect. The US Constitution says that our union must “promote the general welfare,” “insure domestic tranquility” and “secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.” Yes, you are reading this correctly, I know that many of you are probably just assuming that this is some piece of communist trash that I am trying to proliferate, but it is not. This is a core selection from the document that has powered the United States.
So, Rand Paul is for promoting the general welfare of the American people, but he is against them having affordable access to health care, this seems interesting.
He loves our country, but proclaims that we do not have freedom. Either he is a philosopher bent on addressing whether freedom is attainable or he needs to change his sound-bite slogans.
Another thing that made me question Rand Paul and his worthiness was that this guy is running for Senator of the great state of Kentucky and he doesn’t know the difference between unalienable rights and inalienable rights.
The US Declaration of Independence says:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness..”
Fortunately for the good citizens of the United States our rights are unalienable and not inalienable.
However, in Black’s Law Dictionary 2nd edition inalienable is defined as “Not subject to alienation; the characteristic of those things which cannot be bought or sold or transferred from one person to another such as rivers and public highways and certain personal rights; e.g., liberty.”
Unalienable is defined as, “Incapable of being aliened, that is, sold and transferred.”
I will try to be as clear as I can. Inalienable rights can be taken away from you, sold or transferred, according to Black’s 2nd edition. Unalienable rights cannot be taken away from you, sold or transferred.
Though I will admit, in the current vernacular these two words are pretty much synonymous.
Rand continues his misguided support of our great constitution by supporting drastic cuts in our most vital programs, but he would not want to cut military spending.
“With our national debt over 11 trillion dollars, the deficit spending by Washington DC continues to mortgage fruits of our future labor to fund federal programs we don’t need and cannot afford.” I do agree with this. We have a lot of programs that we do not need and that we cannot afford.
Do we really need to have military troops and bases in 63 countries? We have our troops in 156 countries! There are only 46 countries with no US military presence.
This makes a lot of sense. US Citizens get no health care, we go into debt, but for some reason we feel the need to pay insane amounts of money to appease the war hawks who reside in our own backyard.
The Libertarian principles are catchy, different and are gaining momentum in the Republican Party. The Libertarians value the ideals of liberty, keeping a watchful eye on government, decreasing government spending, and making sure the Federal Reserve is not a private bank. These are not bad motives.
However, the Libertarians are very confused right now, and it is showing. For the most part, the Libertarians, along with the Democrats and the Republicans are in bed with the Military Industrial Complex and this has got to stop. Do we want a democracy run by our citizens or a military state run by insane, masochistic generals?
I have a strong conviction that thousands of years of human history have proved the need for public police, public fire protection, public education, public health care and public taxation. We do not and cannot afford to have the private interests continue to run our country.
Remember, Rand Paul stated that “The Federal Government must return to its constitutionally enumerated powers and restore our inalienable rights.” He clearly disagrees with the ideal behind promoting the general welfare and he seems to think that our rights can be taken away, sold or transferred. I guess in a real capitalist society our rights would be inalienable.
Texas Rep. Ron Paul is known as being a staunch Republican-Libertarian hybrid that has incredible disdain towards the federal government. He has also produced a few sons, one of which has decided to run for the Senate in Kentucky.
Rand Paul is an ophthalmologist (eye doctor) and founder of Kentucky Taxpayers United, an anti-taxation organization. He has also spent considerable amounts of time crusading for his father, Ron, on his numerous Presidential campaigns.
Congressman Ron Paul had this to say regarding his sons campaign:
“I’ve always encouraged my children to participate in the public debate. Should Senator Bunning decide not to run, I think Rand would make a great US Senator.
I, like Rand, have been impressed with Senator Bunning’s opposition to the Bank Bailout. I think the Republican Party should be supportive of Senator Bunning and not try to push him out of office.
Should Senator Bunning decide to retire, I think it is important to have a conservative Republican and taxpayer advocate in the race.”
Rand Paul is anti-tax, anti-big government, anti-federal reserve and anti-government involvement in anything besides the military. I am sure he secretly believes that private interests should run our military as well. On his campaign website, which is barely up and running, (His blog politely asks for us to “Please come back later.” His about page simply states that “The requested URL /about/ was not found on this server.”) Rand Paul militantly announces a ‘money bomb.’
“Money bombs can be hard to predict, but we believe we can neutralize the competition with our army of small donors.” Even though this sounds like he has an army of supporters that plan on blowing up money, this is not the case.
Paul has geared up his base in an effort to raise one million by September 23rd, 2009. When you go to his main page you will notice a huge banner proclaiming that “The Fight Is On” and “$892,894.00 toward freedom!” These slogans seem to be typical of any campaign that you might witness across our great country. Whether one is campaigning for Soil and Water Conservation District Supervisor for District 3 in Hennepin County or for Mayor of Yucca Valley California, I would only expect them to march “toward freedom” and blow-up large amounts of money.
But, if we are marching towards freedom, where do we currently stand? Rand Paul surely is not taking the stance that the United States of America does not have freedom, is he?
Paul says that, “The Federal Government must return to its constitutionally enumerated powers and restore our inalienable rights.” That sounds like a worth while cause; something I can stand-up for! But, wait a second. What specifically is Paul talking about?
He could be mentioning the Patriot Act, one of the most disgusting and fascist acts that has ever been passed. We can thank Republican President George W. Bush for this one. Maybe he is talking about the “Nazi-esque” Obama power-grab called Health Care Reform.
Paul would fix health care once and for all, “As Senator, I would ensure that real free market principles are applied to fix this problem.” What the hell does that mean? I can only assume that he is against government involvement in health care too.
So, let me get all of this straight. Mr. Rand Paul is for our constitution, against government involvement in health care and he thinks that we currently are not free. If he is pro-US constitution he must agree with it 100%, right? We have all read it a million times, but here it is again.
“We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
That is so wonderful, I don’t know of any words that could be assembled in any other way that would be so perfect. The US Constitution says that our union must “promote the general welfare,” “insure domestic tranquility” and “secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.” Yes, you are reading this correctly, I know that many of you are probably just assuming that this is some piece of communist trash that I am trying to proliferate, but it is not. This is a core selection from the document that has powered the United States.
So, Rand Paul is for promoting the general welfare of the American people, but he is against them having affordable access to health care, this seems interesting.
He loves our country, but proclaims that we do not have freedom. Either he is a philosopher bent on addressing whether freedom is attainable or he needs to change his sound-bite slogans.
Another thing that made me question Rand Paul and his worthiness was that this guy is running for Senator of the great state of Kentucky and he doesn’t know the difference between unalienable rights and inalienable rights.
The US Declaration of Independence says:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness..”
Fortunately for the good citizens of the United States our rights are unalienable and not inalienable.
However, in Black’s Law Dictionary 2nd edition inalienable is defined as “Not subject to alienation; the characteristic of those things which cannot be bought or sold or transferred from one person to another such as rivers and public highways and certain personal rights; e.g., liberty.”
Unalienable is defined as, “Incapable of being aliened, that is, sold and transferred.”
I will try to be as clear as I can. Inalienable rights can be taken away from you, sold or transferred, according to Black’s 2nd edition. Unalienable rights cannot be taken away from you, sold or transferred.
Though I will admit, in the current vernacular these two words are pretty much synonymous.
Rand continues his misguided support of our great constitution by supporting drastic cuts in our most vital programs, but he would not want to cut military spending.
“With our national debt over 11 trillion dollars, the deficit spending by Washington DC continues to mortgage fruits of our future labor to fund federal programs we don’t need and cannot afford.” I do agree with this. We have a lot of programs that we do not need and that we cannot afford.
Do we really need to have military troops and bases in 63 countries? We have our troops in 156 countries! There are only 46 countries with no US military presence.
This makes a lot of sense. US Citizens get no health care, we go into debt, but for some reason we feel the need to pay insane amounts of money to appease the war hawks who reside in our own backyard.
The Libertarian principles are catchy, different and are gaining momentum in the Republican Party. The Libertarians value the ideals of liberty, keeping a watchful eye on government, decreasing government spending, and making sure the Federal Reserve is not a private bank. These are not bad motives.
However, the Libertarians are very confused right now, and it is showing. For the most part, the Libertarians, along with the Democrats and the Republicans are in bed with the Military Industrial Complex and this has got to stop. Do we want a democracy run by our citizens or a military state run by insane, masochistic generals?
I have a strong conviction that thousands of years of human history have proved the need for public police, public fire protection, public education, public health care and public taxation. We do not and cannot afford to have the private interests continue to run our country.
Remember, Rand Paul stated that “The Federal Government must return to its constitutionally enumerated powers and restore our inalienable rights.” He clearly disagrees with the ideal behind promoting the general welfare and he seems to think that our rights can be taken away, sold or transferred. I guess in a real capitalist society our rights would be inalienable.
Related posts:
![Anonymous: Operation Defense Phase II [CISPA]](http://www.politablog.com/wp-content/themes/politablog/thumb.php?src=wp-content/uploads/AnonymousOperationDefensePhaseIICISPA.jpg&w=35&h=35&zc=1&q=90){kind=small}
Loading ...
This sad attempt at an article purely shows your lack of knowledge about Dr. Paul and the Kentucky Senate race. I guess there is a reason you only have 30 friends on Facebook.
I just re-read this article. I was very correct in my assumptions about Rand. Take notice of his desire to end Civil Rights for all Americans. He may win in Kentucky, but his views and his outlandish behavior will only help to further distance himself from the mainstream.
Oh, and we have 560 fans on Facebook and get roughly 1,000 views a month. How is your website doing?
Yes, KY Repub, you’re right – the correlation between having Facebook friends and producing quality writing is strong. Why don’t you try voicing something constructive that enlightens the reader, since you’re clearly the expert on how to ensnare digital friends, publish insightful commentary, and stay on top of the Kentucky Senate race?
Well. Rand IS Against the Patriot Act.
He’s also against the War in Iraq and wants the troops all brought home. In fact in many of his speeches he talks about how you have to cut the military as well if we’re going to cut our debt.
Tracy
I couldn’t agree more KY repub!! I admit that I dont know anything about the senate race in kentcky, But I probably know more about it then brooks does! I was gonna write a article that was pro conservative but I haven’t had the time. they will take articles and post them so if you know about rand paul you can write a article about him and they will put it up.
Ky Repub- Well, at the time I wrote this article the Rand Paul campaign had established their Money Bomb promotion, but they did not have any information regarding the issues that Rand was for. So, I had to take the information that was available, which was minimal. There is much more information on his stance on issues now available on his site, http://www.randpaul2010.com/ Thank you, RushFanatic for pointing out that we will post your articles, so, for any Rand Paul supporter who feels that I wronged them or dont know what I am talking about, feel free to write an article asserting your beliefs. Tracy- Rand is against the war in Iraq, I later found that out, but he also supports declaring war on Afghanistan. From the site- “As a member of Congress, Dr. Rand Paul would have demanded and voted in the affirmative for a declaration of war with Afghanistan. He would have demanded and voted against a declaration of war with Iraq.” They continue by saying, “he would make defense spending a top priority. In Rand’s proposed budget, defense spending would represent a larger percentage of the total budget than it does today.” It is clear he does not want “ALL” troops brought home, just those that are in Iraq. You say, “he talks about how you have to cut the military as well if we’re going to cut our debt.” In fact, Rand would be increasing Military spending. But check out his site, http://www.randpaul2010.com/ and see for yourself.