rand paul is already flip flopping on his pledge to cut spending if it involves his state. if we have 50 senators with the same thinking how is spending going to get cut? as i long suspected the tea party is really about envy and greed. cut the other guys spending but not mine: "In a bigger shift from his campaign pledge to end earmarks, he tells me that they are a bad "symbol" of easy spending but that he will fight for Kentucky's share of earmarks and federal pork, as long as it's doled out transparently at the committee level and not parachuted in in the dead of night. "I will advocate for Kentucky's interests," he says." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/09/rand-paul-earmarks-ban_n_780832.html
I knew this when I found out Paul railed against government in healthcare yet accepted medicaid and medicare
Posted on Sun, Nov. 07, 2010 Rubio's party loyalty is clear: GOP not tea BY ALEX LEARY AND BETH REINHARD Herald/Times Staff Writers http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/11/...y-is-clear.html When a French TV station set out to understand the American phenomenon known as the tea party, it sent a reporter to Florida, down a dusty country road, past a bug-swarmed pond, and into a Pasco County pasture filled with people waving American flags. It was Oct. 30, three days before Election Day. The crowd had come to Hallelujah Acres Ranch to hear Republican Senate nominee Marco Rubio, frequently hailed -- and claimed -- as one of the tea party's biggest success stories. But the typically unflappable candidate seemed uncomfortable with the French reporter's questions about his tea party ties, as he did when an admirer asked him to autograph a tea party banner. If the tea party is expecting Rubio to plant its yellow ``Don't Tread on Me'' flag in the hallowed Senate chamber, it's in for a letdown. This career politician who once carried the state party's American Express card defines himself first and foremost as a Republican. Rubio's pollster, Whit Ayers, tactfully put it this way: ``I think he'll carry the banner for hopeful and optimistic conservatism and whoever wants to follow that banner is welcome to join.'' PARTY LOYALTY Rubio has already made it clear that he will not be a rogue senator. One day after the election, he declared his support for the GOP establishment when he said he looked forward to serving under Republican Leader Mitch McConnell. He didn't mention Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina, viewed as the more ideologically pure conservative and alternative power center, who championed Rubio's campaign early on. Two days later, McConnell tapped Rubio to deliver the weekly GOP address. Rubio, 39, struck a pragmatic tone at the post-election news conference held in Miami, saying Republicans and Democrats have to work together to tackle big, immediate problems like the national debt and the war in Afghanistan. He did not launch salvos at President Barack Obama, as he usually does, and said he would reach out to Florida's Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson. ``Early on in the primary, a conservative group of passionate, well-intentioned people coincided with his beliefs and somehow he got this tea party label, which I don't think is totally representative,'' said Republican fundraiser Jorge Arrizurieta. ``Did he embrace and receive the support of the tea party? Absolutely,'' Arrizurieta said. ``But will he move away from being a real Republican candidate? No way.''
Ayn Rand Paul is just doing the same thing daddy is doing; telling the public the old gimmick of libertarianism while keeping the status quo of the republican mantra - corporate socialism. Now daddy will get all the headlines and press while he attacks the Fed and the banks but nothing will change. This is all an act.
Look at all the kooks in this thread and it wasn't a even Palin thread. Perhaps Paul is the next best thing.
if any of you had read the wsj article, the full huffington article and the comments at the bottom (as well as had a little info on how the process of "federal pork" giving works) you'd understand a bit better what paul is actually saying. at the committee level, which is what he says he'll fight for, is tons of projects that are budgeted from the federal government every year, placed on committees which then are designed to provide funding to states for certain projects/business within their domain. this is, of course, very different from last minute pork projects thrown into bills with the intent to get politicians to sign on to them in secret, at the dead of night like paul mentions that he is against. just look to the health care bill for examples of that. of course, understanding more of what rand paul says and how the process works doesn't allow for an intelligent discussion on the topic. it just makes good mud slinging and incorrect statements. entertainment value, sure. but it's all bullshit - like the op. i welcome any counterarguments to what i've just said. i doubt i'll get any accurate ones. but here's hoping.
Tea Party will cease to exist soon. Those congressmen and women and senators that play ball will be absorbed, and those that don't will be defeated in primaries next time around. Revolutions eat their children and while this was not a revolution nobody needs a bunch of uncontrollable hillbilies on the hill. I laugh at politico posts where people genuinely believe that republican establishment is so scared off Tea party that tea party will either change the republican party or destroy it. Tea Party helped republicans take the House from the democrats. Now it has outlived its usefulness. Do you honestly believe that Mitch McConnel Karl Rove, and Koch brothers and republican establishmentswould honestly look upon a bunch of crazy hillbilies as equals? That "witch" that said she could go on Hannity any time will soon realize that free publicity from fox news and cash from outside groups will cease for people like her.
Since you seem to be supporting Rand Paul in this thread, let's explore some of your other views about the man. How do you feel about his being a self-certified opthalmologist? How did you regard his proclamation that going after BP because of the oil spill was "un-American?" How do you regard his belief that business owners should be allowed to refuse service to customers solely on the basis of race ("even though he may not personally agree")? And, of course, there's the old standby: