Rand Paul Is ‘Not Quite There’ Yet on Israel, Says Breitbart

anon

What an image!!! – so Rand went to Israel to worship. I thought this was for political talks. Now, will he going to a mosque as well to pray? Wow, Rand has and will have so much influence on republican leadership:)

Of course, we know Rand endorsed paul ryan budget even though he was against it prior to his gleeful unconditional endorsement and campaigning for romney. Same as David Walker.

Left Wing Mole

Talk about being thrown under the bus. Pollak admitted that he (and Ron) wanted to rid of the aid to the so- called enemies of Israel, but then he ignores that fact throughout the rest of the article. Pollak even takes the time to bad mouth the overall liberty movement. Pollak is pure statist.

DS

Love Ron, but Rand is nothing to me. All his sucking up to the neocons won’t be enough. They’ll just rally around a real neocon and Rand will be thrown off the bus, with no friends in sight, having sold out whatever principles he once held.

Anonymous

Yeah, DS. That’s the conclusion I’ve come to. Hope we are wrong and 2015 will arrive with a liberty candidate we can get behind.

anon

sounds like neocons may be playing a game with rand. getting him to give up on his principles while providing fake promises to give him something in return – that is what happens when you join the republican party – that is, they end up getting the better of you.

rand is overextending himself in his interactions with neocons, and it is too bad that libertarians are not warning him to retract, or if they have, then they are not getting thru to rand.

Travis

Gotta give credit to the inimitable Robert Wenzel:

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2013/01/rand-pauls-views-after-7-days-in-isreal.html

I know Rand has a lot of apologists in the liberty movement who think he’s the new standard bearer, but Wenzel has been calling it for a while… Rand is more of a political opportunist than a principled libertarian statesman. Rand’s hypocritical, neocon-lite views on Iran and Israel should serve to drive the point home.

http://twitter.com/RiskManage41 Steve

Wenzel is a negative cancer. He’s bad for the liberty movement. I stopped reading that blog last year when he went full retard on the anti-Rand Paul stuff.

http://twitter.com/dissidentX dissidentX

Breitbart authors need to move there and denounce their US citizenship. It’s obvious who they are loyal to.

anon

i don’t think rand is an opportunist. it just happens that if you choose to be republican and be against a third party as rand is and you are charismatic and your father is a libertarian icon, then establishment will get to you and pull you in bit by bit.

meaning, rand is deceived. and rand will pull others in as well thinking they are fighting for a cause but in reality just wasting time and money. and at the end, just as he did in 2012 elections, rand will rally around whoever estab picks like obama and romney. and he ended up helping romney even while on his father’s campaign by attacking romney’s opponents. who knows, maybe rand will snap out of it and retain some of his former dignity.

what is troubling is that rand doesn’t want to cut off aid to israel at the same time as aid to saudia arabia is cut off.

Dan

Steve is a negative cancer. He’s bad for the liberty movement. I stopped reading his comments when he went full retard on the anti-Robert Wenzel stuff.

Sabrina Liukin

I think Rand realizes that Libertarians haven’t won jack $%#@ in terms of elections, that Gary Johnson hardly got 1% of the popular vote this past election and that the Liberty movement is going nowhere fast unless someone is willing to play the game in Washington. No, he’s not going to take the same hard lined ideological stands like Ron did (and if that is too much for you, then that’s ok and I support you not backing him), but he isn’t a political opportunist like he is being characterized by some of you. He’s a freaking Eye Surgeon for crying out loud. He could go back to that at anytime and keep making a good living doing what he loves.

People need to chill out and start using a little more common sense about Rand.

Jeremiah

Rand’s apologists are astounding in their persistent, purblind folly. What sort of libertarian trashes the NAP by supporting cruel, civilian-ravaging sanctions against a nation that is no significant threat to his own? What manner of non-interventionist believes in meddling violently in the affairs of certain nations, while giving free license (and, for the indefinite nonce, funds) to another? And what sort of patriot seeks to gratify the desires of a foreign state and its powerful lobby?
Rand’s not playing an intricate “game” on behalf of liberty. He’s not some stealth-libertarian awaiting the right moment to doff his statist disguise and commence the revolution. He’s just another trimming politician with one eye on the main chance and another on the imperial throne.

And he’s been one since at least 2010. Most folks simply weren’t paying attention then—and a few still aren’t. See, for instance, Rand’s old electioneering love letter to the “special relationship”—which, among other statements of a markedly partial character, includes a vow to “increase the pressure
on Iran”:

http://spectator.org/blog/2010/04/22/rand-paul-and-israel

Jeremiah

You are being naive. The blandishments of power are, well, powerful—and its effects on the average soul are terrible to behold. Can even a casual student of history—thick as the annals are with tyranny—deny that the corrupting tendency of power is axiomatic? Moreover, few people, once they have tasted power, will knowingly do anything that might return them to obscurity, even to a prosperous obscurity. Power is both corrupting and addictive.

Of course, a noble few are able to resist the temptations of power. The elder Paul is of this rare sort. The younger Paul, on the other hand, shows clear signs of being an average, corruptible soul.

Furthermore, a “game” in which innocent people are aggressed against, injured, even killed, is no game. And any movement on behalf of liberty that endeavors to “play” by tyrants’ rules and measures victory by ballot alone is already finished.

Anon

Rand is not ‘playing the game in Washington’. Rand is being played (ha ha, the joke is on you).

Hypocrisy is embedded in many/some RP republicans. Apparently, they want ‘games’ to be played in Washington. But when it is convenient, they call for no compromises.

This group praised rp for crucifying Santorum (which only helped Romney when he needed it most) for ‘going to get along’ and for compromising for some of the votes that santorum admitted (unliked Romney with romneycare) he regrets.

Now, that same group is praising Rand for doing the same thing (or even worse) than Santorum said he did and regrets. (Admitting mistakes is a good thing.)

Now, you are calling RP’s positions ‘hardlined’ when referencing Rand.

It is not politically savvy or principled to endorse/campaign for paul ryan’s budget plan of no cuts and romney when you made a name in the rp community for being against every single thing that romney stands for and is as a human being. This just shows your downward spiral.

Amfortas

Gradual reduction to Israel which is the only practical means of ever hoping to reduce foreign aid to them is “neocon-lite?” You’re the type of people Rothbard warned about. We’ll never get any headway with you. I’m starting to think you really are antisemitic.

Jeremiah

“Antisemitic”? Well, what if we start to think that you are a tool, not only because you just brandished this cheap smear, but also because you just implied that someone who initiates aggression against innocent civilians deserves some sort of Rothbardian seal of approval. And if you believe that the same presidential aspirant who recently told Tel Aviv that “our agenda in this part of the world is the same as your agenda” will ever seriously consider cutting aid to aid to them, then we may even have to start thinking you are delusional as well.

By the way, I seem to recall that Rothbard was fond of quoting the following aphorism of William Lloyd Garrison: “Gradualism in theory is perpetuity in practice.” And when the gradualists make compromises in which they implicitly or explicitly condone the initiation of force they do positive damage to the cause of liberty.

anon

If Rand had that eye on the ‘imperial throne’ as you say, then he would have started in politics a long time ago. It just happened that is when tea party started and he joined that bandwagon – the same people behind ron are behind rand as well.

Rand is an idiot for implying he can change the republican leadership and he has no plan or vision.

Bottom line as I wrote in other comments here is that he is just deceived, and has no strategy or some sort of agenda as many rp republicans say. And until he gets his act together, he needs to be put on the backburner by those seeking some sort of libertarian policies.

Sabrina Liukin

When have I ever said any of the things you accuse me of?

Sabrina Liukin

Paul Ryan’s budget was criticized not because of principle, it was rejected because of math and the fact that it did not do ANYTHING! Any future congress would not be bound by it.

Jeremiah

Well, you certainly said a few of the things I attributed to you—and for which I criticized you. And I would be most interested in hearing any sort of response or rebuttal you might have.

You said that Rand Paul is not a political opportunist—that his seeming sell-outs to the warfare state are for a good cause and not acts of self-interest. And you naively wondered why he would crave power in Washington when he could batten on eye surgeries in Bowling Green. I replied that you apparently have no understanding of the way power—and the lust for more of it—perverts human hearts and good intentions.

You said that Rand Paul needs to “play the game.” But is a game in which innocents are hurt—as in the case of sanctions and other unnecessary, belligerent actions—truly worth playing? Does “playing the game” mean embracing outright immorality if necessary? Does it mean being prepared to discard the non-aggression principle, the very foundation of libertarianism? If Ron Paul had “gamed” in this fashion when he was in Washington, do you think there would be a significant Liberty Movement today?

You said that the Liberty Movement is “going nowhere fact” unless it achieves electoral victories. But if you must engage in illiberal actions in order to capture votes, if you insist on bastardizing the message for the sake of mass appeal, is your movement truly about liberty anymore; or is just about getting a few middle-of-the-road politicians into power?

anon

Rand Paul endorsed the paul ryan budget, including the math. Because it did not do anything, Republican leadership came up with it and because it serves as a parallel with Obama’s budget and hence Rand supported the ‘do nothing’ plan.

And, Rand will continue to support anything that is statist.

Amfortas

“but also because you just implied that someone who initiates aggression against innocent civilians deserves some sort of Rothbardian seal of approval.”

What the f*** are you talking about? This is no ordinary strawman; you just went full retard.

“And if you believe that the same presidential aspirant who recently told Tel Aviv that “our agenda in this part of the world is the same as your agenda” will ever seriously consider cutting aid to aid to them, then we may even have to start thinking you are delusional as well.”

Perhaps it is you that is delusional if you’re going to take some meaningless rhetoric as confirmation of your bias whilst ignoring the fact that he explicitly stated that he would reduce foreign aid.to them. Should he not do it if he were in such a situation, then he would be a *liar* and that remains to be seen.

This is some serious tinfoil hat stuff you’re spouting.

Sabrina Liukin

You should take some time and listen to what Mr. Doug Weed has to say on the matter.

Sabrina Liukin

What are you talking about? Rand never endorsed Ryan’s budget… he was rather critical of it. Where do you get your information from? And as for the comment above about this group crucifying Santorum… well Rick Santorum’s view of the role of government and the economy are a far cry from anything Rand or Ron has ever advocated. On big issues like war & the Federal Reserve Rick Santorum’s views couldn’t be further from what any anti-war libertarian and critic of the monetary system believes.

Jeremiah

You claim that Rothbard opposed (in your view, rightly) those who disapprove of “gradualists” of Rand Paul’s sort; this must mean that Rothbard would approve of those “gradualist” actions taken by Paul, even though certain of them are clear violations of the non-aggression principle. This is no straw man, but an inescapable precondition of a statement you very clearly made. And your “retard” insult—like your filthy smear above—does nothing to further your case.

Has Rand Paul made any clear commitment to cutting aid to Israel—beyond a few vague statements about gradually weaning them at some undetermined point in the misty future? He has not. Furthermore, in American political culture the rhetoric of the “special relationship” is far from “meaningless.” The Senator, in short, temporizes on the aid question even as he makes public assurances that Tel Aviv’s concerns are Washington’s concerns, and (what’s even more telling) as he actually takes concrete action to make Tel Aviv’s quarrel with Tehran Washington’s quarrel. And yet you expect him to take serious action on aid? Sure.

“Tin foil hat”? Why not? Mine’s a natty homburg.

Stay classy, Amfortas.

Jeremiah

Couldn’t you just tell me instead?

Sabrina Liukin

I basically already have in my previous statements, but since you ask you can see Mr. Wead (not Weed sorry) speak on the matter here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbrUPtwIKuk and here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRwIdLMsjoI

anon

Indeed, Rand endorsed Ryan’s budget – look it up.

I am not talking about Santorum’s econ views, I am saying Ron Paul and his supporters denounced Santorum when he regretted voting for certain legislation as ‘going along to get along’, when Rand supporters say they support Rand because he is infact going to get along with his Romney campaigning.

Now, that is the epitomy of hypocrisy – and hence you lose credibility because you really don’t believe in what you say you stand for.

AJA

Wead is an sick, opportunistic doucebag that lies about Ron Paul and overall lies and does not nothing for Paul – and hence you approve of him because establishment hired him and approves of him.

Jeremiah

I would like to make one correction. Foolishly working from memory (that treacherous thing), I incorrectly attributed a statement— “our agenda in this part of the world is the same as your agenda”—to Sen. Paul that was actually made by Mitch McConnell, who accompanied Paul on his journey to Israel. Mea culpa.

That being said, I stand firmly by my original position. Paul has made other statements—including his recent declaration that Israel’s actions are none of our business but those of Israel’s bête noire Iran are, because the latter actions have “ramifications” for the entire Middle Ease (whereas the actions of US-funded Israel, in his view, must be entirely local in impact!)—that are equally troublesome. And Paul’s own actions, in any case, speak loudly for themselves.

Jeremiah

One further clarification: rather than “accompanied Paul on his journey”; I should’ve said “was in Israel at the same time.” I believe McConnell led a separate delegation. What I wouldn’t give for an “edit” button!

Sabrina Liukin

Endorsements and voting records are two completely different things. Rick Santorum has voted the way he has because it’s what his core beliefs are. He only “regrets” it now because the political climate has changed and his voting record had become a liability. As for Rand endorsing Mitt Romney… well he made a promise as a Senate candidate to endorse the Republican nominee. So Rand was just keeping his word when it became clear that Romney had the race wrapped up. There is no hypocrisy here and no resulting loss of credibility. Furthermore, (and personally speaking) I was begging Ron Paul to “play the game” a little more and try to tailor his ideas to a larger crowd.

OH! And do please provide me with any information you have that supports your claim that Rand did in fact endorse Ryan’s budget.

On second thought, i’ll do it for you b/c you seem to be getting some bad information somewhere. Here’s Rand NOT endorsing Ryan’s budget: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/29/rand-paul-paul-ryan-budget_n_1840121.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular Rand not only never endorsed Ryan’s budget, in fact he voted NO on it as seen here: http://www.businessinsider.com/republicans-that-voted-against-paul-ryan-budget-2012-5 FYI, this took me all of 18 seconds to look up. You should learn how to use Google, it’s great!!

Now, my time is very valuable, and I only do this because I care. But please don’t respond to me with wild claims or any more untrue statements. Take some time and research things for yourself a little. You’re on TomWoods.com for goodness sake, and i’m glad you’ve come this far. We shouldn’t even be arguing over all this anyways, b/c I think at the end of the day, we won’t most of the same things. We won’t the Constitution upheld, we want a significantly smaller and less intrusive federal government. We want to drastically reduce taxes and reign in the out of control spending, and not be so careless with our foreign policy. So let’s try and move past all this petty stuff.

Best regards my friend.

Sabrina Liukin

“Establishment hired him”? I’m sorry I don’t quite follow, please enlighten me a little. Are you implying that Mr. Wead was sent to the Paul campaign to infiltrate and sabotage it? That’s a good one. If that is the case, after everything we’ve seen with Jessie Benton, maybe Ron Paul isn’t the person we needed after all. I mean if what you say is true, Ron would be a very bad judge of character and we could never entrust him to be in a position of power because as you’re suggesting, he is too easily manipulated and duped. Are you calling Dr. Paul a bad judge of character?