Free Capitalist Network - Community Archive
Mises Community Archive
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

Rand Paul's foreign policy speech

rated by 0 users
This post has 5 Replies | 3 Followers

Not Ranked
Male
Posts 478
Points 10,295
FlyingAxe Posted: Mon, Mar 11 2013 10:26 AM
What do you guys think about this speech: www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/02/06/rand_paul_at_heritage_restoring_the_founders_vision_of_foreign_policy.html
  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Posts 1,612
Points 29,515

he's a wolf in sheep's clothing

 

Bush/Paul 2016, hahaha

"The Fed does not make predictions. It makes forecasts..." - Mustang19
  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Male
Posts 1,687
Points 22,990
Bogart replied on Mon, Mar 11 2013 9:55 PM

I would not go that far but Rand Paul is certainly less consistent in his support for liberty and private property than his father.  I find it odd that Rand voted at least for one of these anti-Freedom MDAA votes:

http://www.examiner.com/article/sen-rand-paul-voted-yes-for-the-650-billion-2013-ndaa

  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Posts 452
Points 7,620

Well, I think that we have to start somewhere. Until he's running for president, he has to play along to get along. Of course, he's not Ron Paul, but if he's even 40% policy-wise, then we're making progress.

http://thephoenixsaga.com/
  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Male
Posts 87
Points 1,215
Albert replied on Fri, Mar 22 2013 1:24 PM

Being a politician requires different tactics than being an economist or a commentator. I like most of what he has to say but not all of what he does. He fiilibustered against a nomination and then therafter he voted for that person.

Remember though he was not elected as a libertarian by a majority of libertarians. He was elected by a majority of Republican leaning voters. If he became a radical Libertarian overnight he would be voted out promptly.

As in many previous debates pertaining to previous circumstances, the argument comes down to: Is it better to consistently but slowly change the system from within as long as you have a voice and a pulpit, or to be radical but have no voice? There are places for both approaches but seldom in the same person.

  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Posts 3,739
Points 60,635
Marko replied on Fri, Mar 22 2013 4:25 PM

Remember though he was not elected as a libertarian by a majority of libertarians. He was elected by a majority of Republican leaning voters. If he became a radical Libertarian overnight he would be voted out promptly.


Those are just labels. He was elected as a semi-regime politician. However, most people are not part of the regime. Ergo, if he became a non-regime politician his appeal would at the very least remain unaffected.

As a question of logistics, as in how would he get the word out over the open and relentless oposition by the regime the concern is valid, but not in the actual appeal of the message (if packaged correctly (no beads and Roman sandals)) to the common folk (who are cynical about regime politicians of both parties, even as they elect them).

  • | Post Points: 5
Page 1 of 1 (6 items) | RSS